|
Veteran developer Ron Gilbert was the driving force behind perennial favorites Monkey Island, Maniac Mansion, and other titles using the versatile SCUMM engine.
Currently
shopping around a new project, Ron took some time to speak with
Gamasutra on the ins and outs of storytelling, the struggle of small
developers, and the state of the game industry today.
Gamasutra: so you're the driving force behind the SCUMM engine, Humongous Entertainment, Cavedog... are you rich yet?
Ron Gilbert: No, definitely not yet.
GS: Is it true that you've been working out of DoubleFine?
RG: I was working at Tim's office... I guess it was last summer, but not anymore.
GS: So you're working independently now?
RG: Yeah, I do work out my house.
GS:
So, I've been talking to a lot of people about interactive storytelling
lately. As a veteran of interactive storytelling, how do you feel the
current industry is embracing or defying the concept of telling a story
in a game?
RG:
I think generally they're not doing a very good job of it. I think that
story in games is really way down on the list of people's priorities.
It seems like most games that claim to have story really have
scenarios. It's the scenario of, you know “aliens try to take over the
world and you have to shoot everybody to win.” That's not a story,
that's a scenario. Most games are just scenarios. They have opening cut
scenes which kind of set everything up and maybe there's some kind of
intermittent cut scenes that happen in the middle, but real interactive
storytelling is more about the flow. It's the flow of the game around
the story or the story flowing around the game. There's such a rigid
structure right now in gaming, and I don't think anybody is really
exploring what that can mean. It's a little bit disappointing to me.
GS: Is there anyone in particular that you would single out as doing the right things?
RG: Honestly, I have not played anything in a long time that I thought was doing a particularly good job at telling a story.
GS:
From the development side, how would you say crafting a story for a
game is different than writing a traditional story? Is this disparity
possibly one of the reasons why games are getting it wrong?
RG:
You can go about it in a couple ways, and this leads to a lot of
argument between developers. Some of them are on one side and some are
on the other. I'm a very firm believer that a story is something that
is told by an author and other people think that story has to be
something that… these organic things that are created by the player.
You know, “you can play Grand Theft Auto and you're making your own story.” And I don't necessarily agree with that. I think, you certainly can play Grand Theft Auto
and come away from it with a story. But I think most of the time people
play games they come away with a really bad, boring story.
You
know, a good analogy is something like watching a baseball game. There
are baseball games that are just amazing stories, you know, a duel
between the pitcher and the batters and the way that the game ebbs and
flows and you walk away from watching that baseball game, and you're
going “wow, that was a great baseball game. The story worked and it had
all the drama, everything was great.” But the fact is, 92% of all
baseball games are pretty boring. And I think a lot of this kind of
sandbox-style gameplay like Grand Theft Auto and others... I
think that's what they're like, they're like baseball games. Yes, you
do come away with this incredible story occasionally, but most of the
time it's just boring, and I'm more of the belief that the correct way
is to really sit down and tell a story.
It
doesn't mean that the player can't modify the story and interact with
the story or kind of push the story around, but you know, a story is a
story. The reason stories are so important to us is that they are a
description of the human condition, and it's important for us to have
it put together by a person. When I go to a great movie, one of the
reasons I'm going to pay money to see a great movie is because it has a
great storyteller behind it, telling me his story. They know how to
pace their story and they know all these great things about it and I'm
going to have a good time.
And if I'm playing a game that is built around a story, (and it's not
like games have to have story by any means,) but if I'm playing a game
that is about the story, I have to know that story was crafted by
somebody. I want to know that story means something. And I think one of
the problems that a lot of developers get into is that… I think people
don't have a really good understanding of how to pace an interactive
story. So you get into these situations where you've got a series of
events that make up the story, but they're not paced very well. Things
don't flow correctly through them, and you see these weird kinds of
jerky starts and stops in the drama. I think that's what can makes
interactive storytelling really not appeal to a lot of people. If you
kind of unravel it all, it's just bad storytelling.
GS:
Is that something you think could be handled by developer? Or is it a
trend in the gaming audience, that they're just not willing to accept
this kind of game?
RG:
No, I think this is definitely a developer issue. I think the
developers are just not doing a good job at it. I think if they did a
good job at it I think you'd find a lot more popularity in story games.
But you look at story games and now they're just not very good, they're
not paced very well and frankly, they're not that interesting of a
story. So of course people are not interested in story games.
GS:
Do you think there is validity to the statement that perhaps audiences
want something that an interactive story can't deliver? Things like
action, or fast-paced, frenetic gameplay?
RG:
I think there are certain types of games that certain people play for
certain reasons. There are definitely times when I sit down in the game
and I just want to blow stuff up. I don't really care about the story.
Give me a good pretext, give me a big gun and let me blow things up,
that's what I'm interested in. There are other times when I'm way more
interested in the story, and I think that's one of the times… I think
you could do a really good story game, you know, have a really good
adventure type game. I think you could appeal to a much broader
audience. I think there are a lot of people out there who are just not
willing to play games that involve a lot of twitching and a lot of
action. But if there was more of a slower-paced game like an adventure
game, or a kind of light role-playing game, I think these people would
be a lot more interested and I think one of the things that would
really attract these people who are not hardcore gamers are really
engaging stories. I think that's what adventure games had, and I think
that's what they did to attract a different audience, a different type
of person, then you're getting playing games today.
GS:
When you personally create a character or a storyline, what kind of
elements do you take into account? What would you say is the number one
thing you need to have in creating an engaging story?
RG:
All stories have to have conflict. Without conflict, there's no drama.
And the conflict doesn't necessarily have to be violent conflict. When
you're building a really good story, I think what you're looking for is
“what's the conflict here?” And hopefully you're not just dropping in
some stereotype of some “evil wizard taking over the land.” But you can
have the conflict be just a little more intricate or a little more
sophisticated, and the question with the lead characters is “what is
their role in that conflict?” The character should be different at the
end of the story than they were at the beginning of the story. And that
transformation should matter somehow to the conflict that's going on
and so the things I think about are: “what is the conflict, who is this
character and what is the transformation they're going to go through
throughout the course of the story?”
GS:
When you take into account the early success back in the day of
adventure games, do you think that could be recaptured in today's
industry? Do you feel that the industry is ready to accept an adventure
game with a character-driven story if someone could produce a good one?
RG:
I think it could, but, you know, it's not going to be successful on the
Xbox 360. I think there could be a very good market for adventure games
on the PC, or maybe handheld machines like the Nintendo DS or the PSP.
Certainly on the PC. I think you've got to figure out how you're
selling them to people. I don't think you can necessarily put them on
the shelves at CompUSA or EB. I think there's probably a pretty good
market for that stuff through online distribution. And then those are
the areas where you might be able to capture an audience with a
storytelling style. I think if you can build the games for a reasonable
amount of money, yes, I think there's a good market there.
GS:
In that vein, do you personally have any new projects you're working
on? You mentioned in some other interviews that you had a new project
in the works.
RG:
I do have a kind of very story-heavy, story-based kind of RPG game that
I'm currently designing, but I'm still looking for a publisher willing
to publish it. So I continue to work on it until I find somebody, but
there's a lot of what you talk about here, you know, very heavily
story-based, a lot of sensibilities of adventure games mixed with some
of the action fun RPG elements.
GS:
What are some of the hardships you face as someone with an idea
shopping around a story? The things that you imagine would be faced by
independent developers or anyone who wants to get their word out.
RG:
It's actually kind of frightening, you know. You sit down with a
publisher and the minute you mention anything like an adventure game or
something story-based or adventure-game-like in any way, the meeting's
basically over. So the publishers do have a huge resistance to this.
And I think a lot of it is that they cannot point to anything like this
that is successful in the market today. So it's very difficult for them
to put anything behind it. It's a very difficult process.
|