|
[This is a repost from my original article at gameranting]
Can you sum up 3 video games whose story inspired or moved you? Recently I went through the list of all the games that I played and came to the conclusion that only few game stories left a lasting impression: Half Life, Fall Out 3 and Dead Space.
I've played plenty of games (bioshock, fable 2, the hitman series, devil may cry, resident evil, prototype etc). All of these games have a storyline, yet not one of them is worth remembering. The reason is that in these games the storyline exists in support of the game play: we need a simple excuses to start blasting virtual enemies to kingdom come. In Half-Life, Fall out 3 and Dead Space, the story is on equal footing with the game play. Both game play and story exists next to each other and strengthen each other. As a result these games stand out not because of their game play but because of how story and game play create a wonderful experience for the player.
Is it possible to distill from these 3 games a template for a successful mix of story and game play ?
1. it's all about the player: most game stories resolve around the character, created by the designer. The player is assumed to play the role of an actor, crawling into the skin of this fictional character. Chronicles of Riddick is an extreme example of this: you are playing Vin Diesel, portraying a anti-heroic criminal. Good game stories should resolve around the player and his emotions instead of forcing the player to become someone else.
2. No avatar: since the story should center around the player, he should see the world through his own eyes. Displaying an avatar breaks the illusion. First person games have a great advantage in this case, but third person games can still function provided that the designers use a very simple trick: never show the avatars face. Thus the player can still imagine himself underneath the mask of the avatar.
3. real challenges and choices: Basically a game consists of challenge towards the player and the choices he must make to overcome that challenge. For this challenge to have a real impact on the player, it must be a realistic challenge. In other words, would the player, if faced with the same challenge in real life, make the same decision? If the answer is yes, then this challenge will have a profound impact on the player. Who would not, like in fall out 3, go in search of his missing father? Bioshock instead never offered until midway into the game a compelling reason for the player to enter the sunken city (which is for me the reason why the story failed)
4. realistic world: when the player believes the virtual world to be real, it should also act as a real world. This means that the player must have the impression that he is in a living breathing world. NPC's move about, acting according to their own agenda, not merely there to form an obstacle for the player.
5. avoid the fourth wall: any item in the game that reveals to the player that he is merely playing a game should be avoided. Load times must be limited to a minimal. Game play elements that can reveal themselves as such (I am thinking in particular about boss monsters) posse a serious threat to breaking the suspension of disbelief.
6. forget about cut scenes and quick time events: if there is a surefire way to blow any immersion then its the use of cut scenes and quick time events. Cut scenes reveal to the player that the story is not about him, while QTE's highlight that he's merely playing a game.
In conclusion, if a designer wants to use a game as a story telling vehicle, he must remember that the story is all about the player and his feelings and emotions and that immersion is the key ingredient.
Games failing to this are not necessarily bad games, they just are poor story tellers.
|
1. You mention Dead Space as one of the games from which this template has been crafted, yet it includes both an avatar and cutscenes (albeit minimally).
2. If all good stories avoid the fourth wall, is there any room for games that tell good postmodern stories? I'm thinking about the self-referential nature of the Metal Gear Solid series (e.g., flashing the box-art of a MGS game when talking about how war is often portrayed as a game), the fourth entry of which I consider to have an involving, if convoluted, story. An example more in line with your aforementioned faves might be the invocation of the crowbar at the beginning of Half-Life 2, or the training of the player in Zeno Clash to enact violence-without-purpose.
However, before I do, let me say that I think you made a very valid statement when you offer the assertion that stories revolve around the player (or audience, to be more general about it). That being said, it must be realized that this does not mean that a story cannot be told through one or more character(s); it merely means that the player/audience must form an empathic connection with one or more character(s) who the story revolves around. For example, consider a work of literature such as Jane Eyre; as long as the reader (or viewer of one of the movies based in the book) establishes an emotional empathy and identity with Jane, the story works fine by being told by Jane. Same thing with games or any medium.
Let me offer a few examples of my own where a game's story excelled and made a lasting impression on me. I have chosen most of my examples from works that have been offered in English in one way or another, but there are many more that have not been offered in English. Hopefully, these examples will offer some perspective about the diversity of views about what constitutes an excellent story in a game.
1) Giniro (Silver-colored)
2) Tokimeki Memorial (first, original release)
3) Puppet Princess of Marl Kingdom I (aka Rhapsody)
4) Kana Imouto (Little Sister Kana)
5) Ys I & II
6) Phantasy Star I
7) Xenosaga
8) The Longest Journey
9) Deus Ex
10) Primal
I could name many more, of course, and there'd still be many more Japanese titles than American or European titles in the list, mainly because my psychology and philosophy of life is much more Japanese than Western European or American and I find Japanese storytelling to excel at speaking to me and for me.
That brings up the most important point for a game to have a story that creates a lasting impact on the player: the game's story must create some type of empathic connection with the player's subjective values and motivations.
For example, you mention "6. forget about the cut scenes and quick time events." That may be true for you, but it is certainly not true for many gamers. In fact, for many of us, the entire point of playing a game is to see a cut scene or event played out as a reward for our effort up to that point. Without such scenes, we have no reason to play at all... and we don't play titles without such scenes, for the most part.
Likewise, you state, "4. realistic world." No, this is not at all needed for an excellent story, but what IS required is for the world, setting, events, and characters to be "believable" to the player (or audience, in general), regardless of the type of medium being used, and regardless of whether or not they are "realistic" in any way. In fact, I've found that the focus on making things "realistic" is the single biggest failing of Western game development. Why do I state this? There are a couple of (related) reasons.
One point is that any sense of reality is subjective to our senses; what is realistic for one person is not for another. Also, I have yet to see a game offer any true sense of "realistic." One example you offer is Half-Life, but that game is very far from realistic, even just considering basic elements such as the ludicrous encumbrance of Gordon running around loaded down with all sorts of weapons and ammo. Finally, an attempt to offer "realistic world" as a setting runs afoul of breaking immersion due to a player noticing anything that is unrealistic (a subjective evaluation, in many cases). You can see examples of this type of problem in games such as the Elder Scrolls franchise (ES III: Morrowind and ES IV: Oblivion). Bethesda didn't include all sorts of realistic factors such as needing food, water, and sleep, so some people have made mods that force such things. However, many players don't play with those mods, nor do they wish to even if they could (i.e. if they play on PC and not console). Same thing with elements such as bathrooms, children, etc.
As a final disagreement to point out, you state, "2. No avatar." You claim that an avatar breaks immersion because the player won't identify with the avatar's look. However, exactly the opposite is true for many players regardless of whether we create our own avatar or play a character that is provided by the game. In the former instance, we customize a look that matches how we see ourselves in the virtual setting, or how we would like others to perceive us. This works in opposition to the problem of "lookism" - that is, the error of making assumptions about anyone based on their outward appearance. This is especially important for certain individuals - for example, someone who is transgendered does not "appear" as their true self unless they discover their condition and take steps to portray themselves as they truly are inside. In a virtual world, such an individual can choose an avatar that more closely represents their true, inner self regardless of their outward appearance.
The latter instance means that we, the players, simply select games that allow us to play characters that match who we truly see ourselves to be. As an example, I play with an entirely female party when playing games such as Xenosaga or Star Ocean. In places where the game forces me to play male characters, I play as quickly as possible, and if I cannot play the characters I wish to play as (such as a certain period in Tales of Vesperia) my evaluation of the game's design drops considerably, possibly even to the point where I consider the game to be a failure and simply stop playing entirely.
All of this is basically for consideration when the issue of what is considered "good storytelling" in gaming is being discussed.
Dave Endresak: "In fact, for many of us, the entire point of playing a game is to see a cut scene or event played out as a reward for our effort up to that point. Without such scenes, we have no reason to play at all... and we don't play titles without such scenes, for the most part."
While I agree that cut-scenes shouldn't be completely removed, I think that games should be careful about just how often they use them. Putting a short sequence at the end of a level as a reward is okay, but whenever it becomes a video game's prime storytelling method I really start to question why the developers didn't just make a movie instead. After all, if my only motivation for playing a title is the cinematics, what's to stop me from just watching them on youtube instead of playing the actual game?
So while they're good points you make, they aren't a template or recipe, merely things to consider on the path to your story, if any on of those things detracts from your story, don't do it, but don't exclude them for the sake of doing so.
Likewise, while I think in the modern sphere Cut Scene's and QTEs are often handled poorly, I don't think that means they shouldn't exist, I'm always going back to this QTE so I won't delve deeply, but the QTE in CoD4 with the attack dogs actually increases immersion.
As my own little addendum to what Dave was saying about realistic worlds. A good story could easily be told through a stylised world, many pictures make use of a style or theme to depict what they're going for. Often things involving drug references are crazy vibrant colours, cinema makes use of different lens filters to wash a scene in warm or cold colours to evoke emotive responses. These are often "not realistic" but their value is heightened for not being so. (If sin city was normally coloured I wouldn't watch it! )
In other types of games they wouldn't so well.
A platformer or JRPG need what you what to get rid of.
Imagine Tomb Raider without Lara Croft.
If I want to rp I'll grab my dicebag, in a game I want a likable avatar.
Immersion has become a word I hate, I've been in the zone playing a game but never immersed.
It's a game. Tuck screen commands away etc. , but don't think it somehow pulls a person more
into the game.
1. Yes, it is all about the player. But that does not mean that a game has to be about the player playing as himself. Even in your "good" examples of Half-Life 2 and Fall Out 3, you are not playing yourself but another character caught up in extraordinary circumstances. When I play my favorite games, I'm not Glenn but rather a character with capabilities (and maybe even a personality) different from my own.
2. For the same reason, first-person play does not equate to player-centered play any more than it equates to immersion (as Arthur pointed out). Many of my favorite games through the years have involved me playing the role of a hero that can be seen. I love playing as Indiana Jones, Guybrush Threepwood, Sam Fisher, Lara Croft, or Nathan Drake. In fact I prefer it, because the story is not about me. It's about them. I just get to decide what they do and whether they survive.
3. I lost interest in Bioshock and didn't finish it. But it was not because the choices were unrealistic. As long as the choices are interesting, I don't care about realistic choices. I got tired of going through all of the hoops with the upgrades, the repetetive gameplay, and yes, because the story did not compel me forward. I was curious to find out what happens and why you were there but the gameplay got tedious for me. Again, the game failed for me because of the relatively weak story and the mechanics of the game. (Not to be confused with the difficulty. I found Call of Duty 4 more difficult at times but I finished that game.)
4. No disagreement there. The more alive the world, the better (depending on the game).
5. I agree that immersion is important. But I'm always aware that I am playing a game. As such, I don't care that much if HUD elements are on display or that I might need to press a button to access an on-screen inventory.
6. As others have said here, there is a place for a good cut scene. MGS was always problematic for me in that it always seemed like a game that wished it was a movie. But I like occasional cut scenes that advance the story.
So can a third person game in which you play a character in a fantasy world with fantastic choices and an occasional cut-scene tell a great story. Of course it can! Just ask Guybrush, Lara, or Nathan.