tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3493946997489326661.post5143940097639619584..comments2023-08-11T05:49:23.366-04:00Comments on Exploring Believability: The Orchestrated Story and the Emergent NarrativeJ. Sheahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10652255892382558843noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3493946997489326661.post-61116574109371989872013-01-06T00:22:57.782-05:002013-01-06T00:22:57.782-05:00I agree with your statement "if you're go...I agree with your statement "if you're going to make a game, make it good at what it does." <br /><br />I actually prefer story-based games, so the worst of these games are the ones that I start skipping the dialogue/cutscenes so that I can get on with the game-play. Halo 4 is an example of a game that does extremely well at telling its story and not making the gameplay so drawn out - unlike previous Halo games whereby I ended up running to the next checkpoint rather than fighting to the next checkpoint; in Halo 4 I thoroughly enjoyed the gameplay, and almost every cutscene that arrived, I put the controller down to watch it.<br /><br />For a while now I have been referring to videogames as 'interactive entertainments' in that the viewer takes an active part in having the events play out, rather than being a passive viewer being told the story (as in movies). And i think this is a valid distinction between videogames that really are 'games' and require the player to make valid decisions that will result in real game-time consequences and outcomes, and videogames that are, at the core, linear stories that are experienced through the controlling of a character. When a developer can distinguish between the two, then they can really focus on creating the best experience possible.Warstubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12462907599044043765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3493946997489326661.post-17917729888278676842012-04-26T07:52:40.356-04:002012-04-26T07:52:40.356-04:00the reason pople say HL didnt have cutscenes is be...the reason pople say HL didnt have cutscenes is because thay didnt cut the camera, YES thew were acted scenes, but not CUT-scenes. I myself didnt play any of that series, as I expect Black Mesa is still not dead and I will likely start with it after its released.Dhatzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09378596238915162413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3493946997489326661.post-25171055427225426042012-03-05T00:47:52.151-05:002012-03-05T00:47:52.151-05:00Oh, yes, that's certainly true. The sense of r...Oh, yes, that's certainly true. The sense of responsibility of "being in the driver's seat" certainly plays a role compared to being a passive observer, but at the same time that level of control unfortunately means that you can be a total dickwad (pardon my language) and nobody really notices.<br /><br />I was thinking about this with regards to Red Dead Redemption, where John Marston is obviously his own character, and you're sort of piloting him around, but at the same time the fact that you "are" him, as it were, gives a different relationship than if you were just observing him. You can look at things like how he talks to people on the street (as per the award-winning documentary "¡Hola Señora!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_pqS4X7YG8) and that deepens your understanding of his personality, yet at the same time HE'S not the one driving - YOU are. It's weird.J. Sheahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10652255892382558843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3493946997489326661.post-6327874475738932402012-03-05T00:44:23.774-05:002012-03-05T00:44:23.774-05:00Oh, no, I wasn't suggesting that the ACO4 narr...Oh, no, I wasn't suggesting that the ACO4 narrative made gameplay itself worthwhile, I was citing it as a game where the strong part of the narrative comes from being unable to experience the narrative in a way that wasn't a game. <br /><br />I dumbed down the plot points to make the point; basically there's no way to feel as involved in the narrative of AC04 WITHOUT playing AC04 as a game. If it were a book, it wouldn't have the same emotional impact because you, as a reader, weren't involved in the game's events in the act of reading. The same goes if it were a film or song; the game's interactivity, however linear, is completely what makes the story worthwhile.<br /><br />This is different from other games like Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, or even AC5. The protagonist of the game really is "the player," even if it's as a predetermined character and not as someone sitting on a couch. I'm suggesting that there are more ways for linear games to be considered "artful" rather than just having solid gameplay and cinematics.Glen Isiphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17062123839322175625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3493946997489326661.post-67611452910655774592012-03-04T22:14:18.788-05:002012-03-04T22:14:18.788-05:00I'd definitely say my biggest problem with the...I'd definitely say my biggest problem with the culture of "game stories" is the idea that these limited perceptions of what games can be or should be are what games ARE. Like you said, game designers are willing to use "non-linear" to describe these things that, by comparison to actual open games, might as well just be linear. And yeah, obviously getting more money out of the customer is going to be a big part of market design, but that shouldn't bleed over into an objective analysis of what games are capable of.J. Sheahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10652255892382558843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3493946997489326661.post-72731756378500166112012-03-04T21:19:47.205-05:002012-03-04T21:19:47.205-05:00I was going back over some DICE coverage (finally ...I was going back over some DICE coverage (finally catching up with the talks this year I hadn't had time to check out) and walked right into the following only hours after reading this piece:<br />http://gamespot.com/fight-night-champion/videos/nonlinear-storytelling-dice-2012-session-6350286/<br /><br />Unless I completely got the wrong end of the stick (but I think it was sold quite clearly in the talk), can you see how linear stories with psychological hooks (story arcs which create incomplete purchases from each bit of DLC you buy) to get people to keep buying the new DLC are being sold (by the EA guy) as a great driver of an open world environment. The real non-linear content comes from the emergent gameplay (with systemic game design) that has nothing to do with constantly trying to sell a person the next chunk of linear content for your world.<br /><br />Building an open world with linear story (GTA, Elder Scrolls being two great examples) are narratively linear when you're writing the story (even if you can approach a lot of the content in the order of your choice). The non-linear content is the emergent activities, walking the earth or enjoying the city simulation. That is where the players craft new stories that the designer did not build and yet the guy from (DLC fans) EA gives a big talk about how getting a writing staff around to constantly pump out paid content with story arcs as episodic content is non-linear.<br /><br />I'm starting to get a deep understanding of why EA moved off Steam and it wasn't just Origin was ready to release (EA have no issue sharing sales revenue with any other digital store, as long as those stores don't force them to offer the choice of buying DLC from that same storefront). They see the boxed game as a traditional revenue source for getting the game out the door and are happy to give away some of the money to distributors (digital and retail) because they just got a customer for that product 'platform'. The game (a platform to sell more piecemeal linear story) is their conduit to far more revenue generation by selling DLC to expand the experience. Boxed copies drop in value over time but by enforcing all DLC via Origin they can keep 100% of that new big revenue stream and avoid a traditional price depreciation. That's worth losing any sales through Steam for on PC. Mass Effect 2 is £5 retail but you have to pay £30 on top to get all the DLC (if you made the mistake of buying Me2 used then it's a £40 cost to buy all the DLC including the stuff that comes with the new copies) and complete the story and all that money goes direct to EA. Imagine if all that DLC was critical to your full understanding of the story arcs of the game and they all chained together so buying one meant a sunk cost pushing buying the next one to see that multi-DLC story arc blossom. It has nothing to do with emergent non-linear stories, non-linear is only true in the strictest sense that you can do a lot of content (especially with a Elder Scrolls style many-linear chain design) in an order of your choosing. Like reading 3 books about the same character at once and picking where you go for the next chapter as you flick between them.Jess 'Shivoa' Birchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14418591292866802372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3493946997489326661.post-64257214050157550912012-03-03T20:31:16.306-05:002012-03-03T20:31:16.306-05:00Actually, the "viewpoint" of AC04 is a y...Actually, the "viewpoint" of AC04 is a young boy who's actually "on your side", as it were. While he speaks to the villain and humanizes them through his interaction, they are still obviously "the bad guys" (or at least "the aggressors"), and Mobius One is a hero fighting to defend his country against an undoubtedly unjust regime. The Yellow Squadron is depicted nobly, but not as being GOOD, just as being decent and honorable.<br /><br />And, again, your actions in the game don't change anything. No matter who you shoot down, which plane it is, it's going to end up being The Female Yellow Squadron Pilot, and her plane's not going to be able to make it back. You can't change anything through your actions. What's funny is that while Ace Combat Zero had a "branching" system (Knight/Soldier/Mercenary), it was changed through relatively mundane gameplay actions and tradeoffs: not KILL BABIES versus SAVE ORPHANS, but instead "spare wounded plane" versus "destroy wounded plane and get more money from the bounty". It wasn't perfect, or even really natural, but it was a scenario in which the way you played the game actually mattered.J. Sheahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10652255892382558843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3493946997489326661.post-55473253300123280452012-03-03T16:43:19.645-05:002012-03-03T16:43:19.645-05:00Some games can pull off immersion in a "meta&...Some games can pull off immersion in a "meta" sense. One game I repeatedly endorse is the PS2 game Ace Combat 04, for the reason that its narrative ties into the gameplay experience in a way that the books and movies can't. The player is never referenced by name, but is also never seen in cutscenes; in fact, the cutscenes focus on the story of the antagonists. The great part about this is that the player isn't told whose story is being viewed until about a third of the way through the game. (Sharper players can figure it out sooner. I didn't.)<br /><br />While it's still a strictly linear game progression, it's interesting because the player doesn't get much backstory for his avatar, except for the in-game chatter exclaiming that he's male and he's a remarkable pilot. You're essentially playing a "villain" to the story of the game, which can be satisfyingly unnerving, as the Ace Combat games regularly denounce war in their in-game narratives. The linearity of the game also plays to a sort of dramatic irony, as you know that in order to see the ending, you will have to shoot down the planes of the characters you're identifying with.<br /><br />I don't know of any other examples like this (so far) but it's long been my favorite example of a metafiction in interactive narratives.Glen Isiphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17062123839322175625noreply@blogger.com