So I wrote an essay on non-linear storytelling and I think it's pretty good. I'm thinking about submitting a revised copy to a few literary journals, so I need a little bit of vetting.

So if you're interested in my thoughts on storytelling in videogames and don't mind reading 14 pages on the topic, please head to the link below and give it a read. It's a PDF, so you'll need adobe reader. Post your thoughts here as I'd love to hear them.

http://download.yousendit.com/81EC4D200A47D85B

~Jason

I'll give it a read in the next few days but I'm too damn tired right now

That was pretty good, but I must say that, since english isn't my first language it's hard to say whether a text is really well thought up or not.
I did think your ending isn't very strong, you speak alot about mass effect and how it could have been better (I agree on that) but you suddenly sort of stop.
Mass effect, council, would've been better... and that's my solution to narrative in games, bam.
but it doesn't really feel complete, although I wouldn't be able to suggest an alternative so I don't know if this is useful advice in the firstplace.
the rest of the text was top stuff, (I refuse to use top notch and other clichés, oh how "top notch" angers me)
but as a whole perhaps a bit too "mass effect centered"
ofcourse you need some sort of an example so, well yeah disregard that bit.
it needs to be said though.

Ah, good. Ive been thinking about this for some time, Ill give it a read.

Edit: Oh, digital fiction, how catchy

Intriguing, it looks absolutely phenomenal. Top notch work if I do say so myself. 2 things, don't use a coma so often like this "aafafafda. Though, however, wqdwdf

That sort of a thing is a no no. You do it EVERY sentence practically. Also, be prepared for any journals to slice donw the legnth.

Dragonfliet+Storytelling=Should be good



Enjoying it so far, maybe I'll read the rest of this on my royal throne tonight

I'm going to check this out, I'm very interested in writing for games. I'll give my feedback at a later date. ; ]
*prepares self*

ghost12332 wrote:"aafafafda. Though, however, wqdwdf"

I totally couldn't help but laugh at your example. I agree, I'm prone to over comma use, and I shall certainly pay attention to that when I revise it (this is very much a first draft).

I'm also sensitive to the fact that it's Mass Effect centric. I will go ahead and point it out more specifically as a center piece (I had originally planned to use it a little more sparingly, but then again, I had originally thought the paper would be half this length), as it is a model more so than an example. I wrote a tentative draft while I was playing through Mass Effect that drew more heavily on Deus Ex and Fallout, for example, but while going through some of the older games I realized that they are not nearly as open as I remembered to be, and Mass Effect encompassed many of their successes/faults very well. I also realized that STALKER is another good example that I missed out on, especially since it's not so focused specifically on dialogue. I shall probably add a little bit on that.

Thanks for your feedback so far and yeah, digital fiction is great. There are so many silly phrases used (the guys that made Facade call their game "digital drama" which is so silly it kills me, Janet Murray uses "Cyberdrama" which, I feel, is even worse: it conjures to mind the "World of the Future" visions from the fifties) and that one seemed to balance sophisticated (fiction over game) without going overboard.

If anyone is interested in reading more of this type of stuff, I highly recommend a book called "First Person: New Media as Story, Performance and Game" edited by Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Pat Harrigan. It's often dry and boring, and it's not particularly interested in Narrative theory (which is what my paper is mostly about within the context of game play), but it is very interesting nevertheless when examining videogames in a more scholarly manner.

Lastly, I do have a list of references, but since I have made no direct references to scholarly sources (this paper is not really in need of it, I feel), I didn't feel the need to give you guys a list of the games I've used along with their publishers and dates published.

~Jason

Interesting read, just thought I'd give a few comments.

I thought you'd missed out on an opportunity by talking nearly exclusively about games where you determine the character by your choices ie rpgs.
What about games where you are given a character that has his own attitudes and views? You barely touched the idea, which is a shame since there is a lot of cool stuff that can be done with that style. A game where you can not do anything that the character will not do opens many possibilites, such as exploring that character through what he will and will not do. It also makes it easier to account for the players actions, and stops a player controlling a perfectly sane character who happens to be carrying a gun just walking outside and shooting everything that moves.

For issues like characters not remembering your actions your suggestion is simply "make them remember my actions". The reason why characters in games don't remember the players actions and why the players choices don't make any diffence is the workload for the developer. The more narrative choices that are accounted for, the more paths have to be laid out by the developer.
The idea of the player failing and letting an npc die, hence cutting of an entire chunk of the game or making a choice that splits the entire rest of the game in half is, to put it bluntly, a pipe dream. Far more likely and easier on the devs would be that the choice doesn't lead down path A or B but instead puts a different spin on the next part of the game. For your example of the druggie asking to go down to the forest, and if you do the DEA busts you, ore if you don't the druggie attacks you the choice is far too meaningful. The meaning of the game hinging on one decision is unreasonable and in this case, has an unrealistic level of impact on the characters.
So you don't let the druggie shoot up? He makes some frustrated comments during the car ride and VAR DRUGGIE_THINKS_YOURE_A_SQUARE goes up by 1, factoring into the tone of a few of his lines through the game depending on how your character acts towards his habit(but not making a big enough difference that it totally changes the course of the dialogue that those lines are in). If you do let him go into the bush? When you get back to his house his sister glares at you when the druggie mentions it and maybe some of her lines change a bit too. By making the choices have only a little impact but having many of them you help veil the paths and make the game feel more flowing and realistic instead of "A moral dilemma approaches! Are you ready? Here it is:".

Nevertheless, I found the essay suprisingly well written and mature given it's content.

Thanks for that comments. I will address a few of them here and I will also address them a little more fully in the paper when I revise (people getting the wrong idea is wonderful help for me, that way I can make sure that in the final I am not mincing any words).

Games already control what you can and cannot do based on your character. Try and kill the shoot your teammates in Mass Effect, try and engage a random stranger in conversation in GTA, etc. These limits are already there, hence most games you are limited to who you can kill, who you can interact with, etc. and dialogue choices simply aren't there. I do address this issue a little bit when I suggest limiting choices. If I save all babies, I shouldn't even be presented with the option of killing a baby-it's completely out of character and makes no narrative sense. By using, for instance, the light/dark (paragon/renegade) points in a game like Mass Effect, it should decide what dialogue options should even be considered unless an outside influence (romantic interest protesting the killing of a species, for example) intervenes.

For the other issue, I have addressed this slightly in my paper, but I will most certainly expand it to clarify:

While I am essentially saying "make them remember my actions," it is slightly more nuanced than that. Most games with non-linear storylines are already huge. They span massive amounts of space and have a massive amount of action. I am simply urging them to restrict it depending on your actions.

A few examples: In the extinction of a species example (a favorite of mine): I am exhorted to save it, but I kill it, when I next speak to romantic interest, I am rebuffed and the conversation is centered around the fact that I'm a cold, heartless bastard who doesn't listen to her. Small amount of work added and the lovescene is cut. If I save it, small section in next conversation where she thanks me for taking her seriously and listening to her. Already I have direct feedback that applies to the actions that I take in the game with minimal additional work.

Another example: In Mass Effect, when you complete a certain mission Rex kills the prisoner. This happens no matter what. You can yell at him or congratulate him, it doesn't matter. Later in the game, you learn about his father's armor and how he wants to kill the mercenary who has it. This is told to you no matter what. If, however, we are at odds (VAR REX_THINKS_YOU'RE_SOFT), he wouldn't tell this to my character at all. Why would he?

What I didn't put in my essay, and I will be adding, is that I do suggest more work. I suggest that confrontations actually count. When there is a major confrontation, that in particular needs to be remembered and when there is a minor confrontation, that needs to be put into a tally. With this focus, however, other work can be scrapped. In Mass Effect, for example, none of my relationship decisions matter at all, yet I can look at all of these different planets with different little bits of writing about them and I can wander around aimlessly looking for little, stupid scraps of metal that doesn't matter anyways and I can find an alien artifact that has a very long piece of writing (given as text) about aliens observing a day for a simian and it too means nothing and doesn't matter at all. Any game with non-linear elements has a whole bunch of STUFF that's not connected, but doesn't bother spending time working on the stuff that matters, like remembering important incidences and building meaning into interactions.

While my scenario veers on a completely different path, I meant it to (and will elaborate in the revision) be only a single level in a longer game. Instead of having one level, the level designers have two (or instead of going to both scenarios they instead only go to one), and there is more writing/voice acting/animation work to accommodate the different decisions.

Lastly, while I understand (again my fault) why you have taken this to be a ARE YOU READY HERE IT IS kind of a dilemma, since the player is already driving, they will most likely think that the decision they make is the only one given to them. They will either say okay and turn or say no and keep going and unless it's spelled out for them, they won't realize at all the implications. This is important. It's a quick decision, but so much hinges on it and how should THEY know what the consequences of that are? I think that should be incorporated as it gives the narrative that much more weight.

Again, you have some very legitimate gripes about this piece and I'm really glad that you brought them to my attention, as I didn't see some of the holes in my argument. Again, I am clarifying here because I won't be posting up the revisions (how annoying would that be) unless I get it published and I feel that that questions you are posing deserve to be addressed.

Lastly: Where there hell are the heavy hitters on the forum with this? Where the heck is Athlete and Shadow and Vivi and All the other people I would expect to have an opinion? I'm also curious to hear some people who flat out disagree with what I'm saying rather than realizing that I've failed to say something right.

~Jason

Wish I could go into paint and circle the dumb little grammer errors. Overall, I really enjoyed this read, great work. I can't really find anything to complain about cuz I agree with everything u said in it.

Kodox wrote:Wish I could go into paint and circle the dumb little grammer errors.

Oh yes, the benefits of PDF: I don't have to deal with people highlighting dumb little grammatical errors for something that will be soon rewritten.

Glad you liked it though.

~Jason

Clash of the giant walls of text!

dragonfliet wrote: Games already control what you can and cannot do based on your character. Try and kill the shoot your teammates in Mass Effect, try and engage a random stranger in conversation in GTA, etc. These limits are already there, hence most games you are limited to who you can kill, who you can interact with, etc. and dialogue choices simply aren't there. I do address this issue a little bit when I suggest limiting choices. If I save all babies, I shouldn't even be presented with the option of killing a baby-it's completely out of character and makes no narrative sense. By using, for instance, the light/dark (paragon/renegade) points in a game like Mass Effect, it should decide what dialogue options should even be considered unless an outside influence (romantic interest protesting the killing of a species, for example) intervenes.

You keep talking about it, but not not every developer is Bioware and not every game is Mass Effect.
You're talking exclusively about RPG games where the player decides his own character from the start and then acts it out. That's the point of RPGs- they're role playing games.
But most games aren't rpg's and they lump you with a finished character from the start, and you don't really talk about this type of narrative much. Some talk on, say, how linear games such as Half Life 2 could have their narrative beefed up would have made your essay feel much more over-arching.

Also, someone hasn't played Bully!

dragonfliet wrote: While I am essentially saying "make them remember my actions," it is slightly more nuanced than that. Most games with non-linear storylines are already huge. They span massive amounts of space and have a massive amount of action. I am simply urging them to restrict it depending on your actions.

Personally, I'm not of the opinion that cutting an entire chunk of the game out because the player, say, insulted a character necessarily equals a good narrative. It just means that the developer has craploads of money and manpower to throw around.
I mean, obviously the player isn't going to be able to see every bit of content in a game that lets him choose stuff, but completely cutting out a whole string of quests or whatever without a trace seems more of a selling point than anything else.

dragonfliet wrote: Another example: In Mass Effect, when you complete a certain mission Rex kills the prisoner. This happens no matter what. You can yell at him or congratulate him, it doesn't matter. Later in the game, you learn about his father's armor and how he wants to kill the mercenary who has it. This is told to you no matter what. If, however, we are at odds (VAR REX_THINKS_YOU'RE_SOFT), he wouldn't tell this to my character at all. Why would he?

Small little dialogue changes are exactly what I was talking about. Sounds good to me.

dragonfliet wrote: What I didn't put in my essay, and I will be adding, is that I do suggest more work. I suggest that confrontations actually count. When there is a major confrontation, that in particular needs to be remembered and when there is a minor confrontation, that needs to be put into a tally. With this focus, however, other work can be scrapped. In Mass Effect, for example, none of my relationship decisions matter at all, yet I can look at all of these different planets with different little bits of writing about them and I can wander around aimlessly looking for little, stupid scraps of metal that doesn't matter anyways and I can find an alien artifact that has a very long piece of writing (given as text) about aliens observing a day for a simian and it too means nothing and doesn't matter at all. Any game with non-linear elements has a whole bunch of STUFF that's not connected, but doesn't bother spending time working on the stuff that matters, like remembering important incidences and building meaning into interactions.

Eh, they probably got some fanboys on their forums to write it. Not every game has a whole bunch of stuff (because not every developer has the time) but neglects to connect it- this seems more a condemnation against Bioware for concentrating on trivial stuff to create an 'expansive universe' than anything else.

dragonfliet wrote: While my scenario veers on a completely different path, I meant it to (and will elaborate in the revision) be only a single level in a longer game. Instead of having one level, the level designers have two (or instead of going to both scenarios they instead only go to one), and there is more writing/voice acting/animation work to accommodate the different decisions.

Exactly? Two different levels is twice as much work. having both choices lead to the same level but with smaller, easier changes would be more realistic.

dragonfliet wrote: Lastly, while I understand (again my fault) why you have taken this to be a ARE YOU READY HERE IT IS kind of a dilemma, since the player is already driving, they will most likely think that the decision they make is the only one given to them. They will either say okay and turn or say no and keep going and unless it's spelled out for them, they won't realize at all the implications. This is important. It's a quick decision, but so much hinges on it and how should THEY know what the consequences of that are? I think that should be incorporated as it gives the narrative that much more weight.

Having the implications of the choice spelled out is absolutely neccesary, otherwise it's just a great waste of time. I was just saying that having EVERYTHING hinge on one decision sort of rings hollow.

dragonfliet wrote: Again, you have some very legitimate gripes about this piece and I'm really glad that you brought them to my attention, as I didn't see some of the holes in my argument. Again, I am clarifying here because I won't be posting up the revisions (how annoying would that be) unless I get it published and I feel that that questions you are posing deserve to be addressed.

Sure thing.

dragonfliet wrote: I'm also curious to hear some people who flat out disagree with what I'm saying rather than realizing that I've failed to say something right.

~Jason

Interlopers.net Forum Index || Gaming Chat

I don't think you're going to have much luck there.

Ack, can't deal with wall o' text

#1
You're right, not every game is Mass Effect, nor are they all RPGs and nor are they all non-linear. I think HL2 is a fantastic example of telling a story the right way. It, however (and all linear story games) is completely outside of the scope of this essay as I'm only focusing on non-linear games (and it's already long enough). Yes, most games have pre-defined characters, but i don't feel that this warrants mention. In STALKER, for instance, you have a pre-defined character, but how you choose to act shapes the narrative of the game, but it doesn't really matter that he's pre-defined as he is REALLY defined through the actions of the player. The Suffering too was interesting in having a pre-defined character who was either a murderer or falsely imprisoned depending on how they player played the game (which carried over into the sequel, which was quite nice). So there are a few examples, but they are really not as good of examples (been playing through STALKER, and while it's a good game, is meandering and annoying this second time through and while it doesn't boast the sheer amount of Dialogue and choices Mass effect does, it still relies very heavily on dialogue for game decisions and The Suffering was more the case of a few simple decisions).

Anyways, I think we're saying very similar things in different ways here. (I think).

#2
I'm of the opinion that simply having massive amounts of game is a selling point more than anything else. What's the point of choices if they're meaningless (unless that is very point of your narrative-a la Bioshock)? I can't think of a single non-linear storline game outside of DX2 (ugh) that wasn't surprisingly sprawling with stuff to do. I'm arguing simply to cut the fat of each narrative and provide for strong, unique, densely packed playthroughs that encourage further exploration rather than sprawling, loosely linked playthroughs that leave a player feeling too exhausted and bored to come back. I, for one, would rather see two unique 2 hour movies than one, sprawling 4 hour movie.

#4
No, games do not use the writing of fanboys. They have a staff of writers who are cranking out this worthless crap. It's cute and it's neat that they bother doing all of it, but it's ultimately worthless. Nearly every non-linear story game is chock full of this random stuff that has no actual meaning in the game. While it may seem like a complaint leveled at BioWare, it's a complaint leveled at anyone who will spend their time creating excess instead of substance.

#5
Let me clarify: Why make a 15 hour game that's good 1 time when you could make a 7 hour game that's good two times? Let's take HL2, if they had pursued a non-linear path, how much more interesting would it have been if the buggy and the waterboat were separate choices? One way is full of one danger, another way a different danger. One way has a certain group of NPCs, another way a different set. Yes, this results in a shorter game, but it also results in more replayability. In this example it doesn't actually matter for the story, but when you do this with choices that actually affect the narrative of the story, it suddenly is much more impactful. What if one way Barny was the passenger and the other way it was Alyx? One way is the remembrances of the things past(, the other is the striving for the future (we all know which one Proust would choose). Valve didn't do that, HL2 isn't that type of game (completely linear gameplay and story-wise), but if they had gone the non-linear story route how interesting are those choices?

I'm arguing for the choices to impact the way the story is told, not for them to be frivolous wastes of developer time. I realize that extra content=extra work, extra time, extra money; but games are already designed with so much of this overlap and length that when they're actually going for non-linear storytelling (again, almost entirely RPGs unfortunately), shouldn't they take advantage of such options?

# 6

I agree, everything hinging on single actions would be frustrating for both developers and gamers. It would have to depend on the situation. A choice of left or right is by default a single choice that lead in opposite directions, but how much, say, a person likes you is something that isn't a spur choice.

#7

I don't know, there's some crazies on here that still think that Final Fantasy 7 was a good game.

Yeah, I'm trying to bait people into posting (it was still dumb though)

~Jason

Could you host it again please:

This file has expired.

I would love to read it.