Story in games?

[alanschu]

Splinter Cell is a very good game IMO.

 

And the series only got better with each game.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Ha! I didn't play the first one, so I came to the series new at Two. It was a little silly that Max kept miraculously reviving when seemingly so full of holes, but how is that anymore far-fetched than "eating" a health pack in any of your brand-leading shooters, like Doom and Half-Life?

 

Well, one is more game mechanic oriented, the other one not really. I'm looking at it trough the perspective that what happens directly ingame takes quite a different direction than what happens in story segments. The former is meant to suspend our belief for long stretches of gameplay conventions, the later is a more serious aspect nearing on realism (or simply placed in a context outside of usual gaming conventions) and in that case it tends to break down. Taking bullets and healing one self instantaneously with painkillers is farfetched, but the prospect of having the character miraculously survive trough ordeals when these situations are not ruled by game conventions at all seems more incredulous.

 

Still, it's a fun ride.

 

 

Sure, I would have liked it to be a little longer, but nothings perfect ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Only my girlfriend :ph34r:

[Gabrielle]

Oh please; can't I stab members without interference nowadays? Pffft.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stabbing? I'm not sure Gabrielle's into the whole dominatrix thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A little bloodletting is good but I'm the one that does the cutting.

 

Back on topic. I thought the story from the original Baldur's Gate and Kotor 1 was donw very well. I here that PST was good but I never got far in the game. I found it dull and boring.

[alanschu]

It is rather verbose, and gets off to a much slower start.

[metadigital]

... Sure, I would have liked it to be a little longer, but nothing's perfect ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Only my girlfriend :ph34r:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh really? How long does she last? "

[Diogo Ribeiro]

She's infinitely replayable

[alanschu]

She like Counterstrike?

[Drakron]

Role-Player is just saying that because she would burst his balls.

 

Fear portuguese women ... heck fear women!

[Sargallath Abraxium]

Fear portuguese women ... heck fear women!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

...The Force is strong with you, young padawan...wise past your years, are you...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Role-Player is just saying that because she would burst his balls.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That might be more true than you think... She practices karate. And by practice I mean she's a 10th Dan. Aka, black belt :ph34r:

[Drakron]

Tai kwan do.

 

 

Still ...

 

[Walsingham]

You're only doing this cause you know Fionavar s tied up with the human sexuality thread.

 

Freudian slip there.

 

~~

 

Getting back to story. What is a good story? We've been arguing over who has one, without saying what it IS.

 

I'll say a story does two things, at the primitive level

 

1) Makes you feel things

2) teaches you things

 

A good story makes you feel extreme things, very happy and very sad, while teaching you things from tolerance to how to cook mynok stew. A lousy story makes you feel nothing, and teaches you nothing.

[Sargallath Abraxium]

You're only doing this cause you know Fionavar s tied up with the human sexuality thread.

 

Freudian slip there.

 

~~

 

Getting back to story. What is a good story? We've been arguing over who has one, without saying what it IS.

 

I'll say a story does two things, at the primitive level

 

1) Makes you feel things

2) teaches you things

 

A good story makes you feel extreme things, very happy and very sad, while teaching you things from tolerance to how to cook mynok stew. A lousy story makes you feel nothing, and teaches you nothing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

...how true...the NeverWorkin'Right OC taught me how to fall asleep while still playin'...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

[Musopticon?]

A good story also moves the game forward, preventing it from stagnating.

[metadigital]

As I said previously, John Cleese was adament about one very important aspect of story telling in his classic comedy series, Fawlty Towers (based on an actual innkeeper in Torquay, aparently, who threw Terry Gilliam's suitcases out of the window onto the front garden): it was that any advancement in the plot should not be in the obvious format that had bedevilled comedies. Whenever you have the plot advance, it is almost like there is a big neon sign flashing overhead, saying "plot point".

 

He tried to (and successfully, for my money) place the plot in such a way that it was not completely obvious where it was going next.

 

I really enjoyed Spanglish, a recent RomCom (I guess, or at least a SitCom) because it had good acting and a plot that was not clich

[Walsingham]

Hang on, meta. So how DID he advance the plot so cleverly? Can we distill some rules?

 

[/Russian]

[metadigital]

Well, I would recommend watching all the shows, if nothing else you should be on the floor in stitches during the viewing.

 

He and Connie Booth (his wife at the time and co-writer, also the co-star Polly) made sure that whenever something happened in the progression of the plot, it wasn't there just for the sake of the plot. It was multi-functional, if I can be as blunt as that.

 

When the Chef left early and the guest arrived late in The Waldorf Salad, there were punchy dialogue lines between them all, so that the audience is taken along in the perfectly normal flow of the narrative, not given big pushes into awkward set-ups for the comical lines.

 

It's all under the surface, like a swan swimming.

 

For example, another classic episode (probably the one of the greatest moments in comic history) is The Germans. The plot synopsis is:

Sybil is in hospital for her ingrowing toenail.

[metadigital]

I just watched Stanley Kubrick's classic film conversion of the equally legendary Arthur C. Clarke novel 2001: A space Odyssey.

 

What makes this a classic film? Well, lots of things; I can't think of a Kubrick film that isn't a classic, for a start. But let's concentrate on the narrative, as that is the topic of this thread.

 

Point One: This is a classic film made from a classic novel. See? It can be done!

 

Point Two: The narrative arc is quite simple, without being simplistic. It has a number of themes that are explored, like:

• the actual nature of the solar system and space on our senses;
  
• space travel, its hazards and benefits, and even the mundane;
  
• advanced technology in a future civilization;
  
• first contact with an alien intelligence;
  
• plausible extra-terresterial impulsion for human intelligence and evolutionary superiority;
  
• Artificial Intelligence; and
  
• future evolution for humankind.
  

It deals with all of these themes in a psychological thriller format, to propel the plot to its conclusion, even though the structure of the film is a tonal play.

 

Basically, the simple story of the trigger for First Contact. It is such a simple story, that Clarke first wrote it as a short story, called "Sentinel".

 

Upon this narrative, all the depth and interesting intricacies can be written, so that the audience may take a little sip, or dive into the ocean of detail, whilst still within the standard filmic medium.

[Cantousent]

Eyes Wide Shut surely cannot be called a classic.

 

At any rate, if we're complaining about games no longer being centered on a story, that's one matter. If we're talking about stories in general and how they translate into games, that's another. Related, maybe, but still different.

 

There are so many elements that go into the idea of story that it might be much easier to create separate threads for those elements and come to some sort of agreement about how we're going to use the terms.

[Walsingham]

Keep it coming, gentlemen. This is good.

[Llyranor]

I think a big problem with gaming (I refer mostly to RPGs) and their stories is because it's all so segmented. After all, the devs have to cater to both gameplay and story, often reinforcing the former to the detriment of the latter (which is especially bad when the former is tedious and dull). They cut the game in arbitrary sections, following obsolete gaming conventions that SHOULDN'T still be followed.

 

Cutscene/story mode, then exploration mode, talking to townies mode, dungeon mode, combat mode. Some of these, the way they're implemented NOW, hurt storytelling. When in dungeon mode, all odds are off! The protagonist turns into a vicious killer, murdering with impunity - with barely any consequences.

 

"So, you've wiped out this entire mansion? Do you realize what will happen now?"

"Whoops."

"Erm, well. I hope you have a good explanation."

"It was self-defense!"

"Okay, then we'll let you proceed to the next part of the story. This, of course, makes perfectly good sense story-wise."

 

It's things like these, where gameplay suppresses story's voice, that make the story suffer. But that's just one instance.

[Calax]

Like in Kotor and Kotor 2 where you could wipe out entire species and see not a single Darkside point and have nobody even mention the fact that you've just commited genocide against this creature.

[metadigital]

Eyes Wide Shut surely cannot be called a classic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Y'know, I hated that when I went to see it at the cinema upon its global release. Then Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman's marriage ended. And then a lot of the elements of the film seemed to take on another, more almost sinisterly art-immitating-life-imitating-art quality. I think the destruction of the marriage in Eyes Wide Shut had very clear echoes ( :D ) in the actors' real lives.

 

In any case, after re-watching Clockwork Orange and 2001, I am convinced Kubrick should be given the benefit of the doubt.

At any rate, if we're complaining about games no longer being centered on a story, that's one matter.  If we're talking about stories in general and how they translate into games, that's another.  Related, maybe, but still different.

 

There are so many elements that go into the idea of story that it might be much easier to create separate threads for those elements and come to some sort of agreement about how we're going to use the terms.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think we can safely assume the meat of the topic is "how to make a great game". The latter is might appear more pertinent (but we may yet pick them up in other threads, who knows?); I wuld contend that we haven't finished wringing out the two in relation to each other, yet.

 

Just from a personal viewpoint, I would be interested in a SF setting for a game (just because that is what I find the most interesting of the versatile story vehicles). That said, I seem to be surrounded by similarly-appreciative people, considering the popularity of Fallout, etc.

 

There have been numerous stories converted to film and games, sometimes in several incarnations. (There are something in the order of 23 Star Trek games, for example: certainly the last two were identical in plot.)

 

As long as the story is a "good" one, the gameplay translation of that story seems to be critical, and what we seem to be discussing here, methinks.

I think a big problem with gaming (I refer mostly to RPGs) and their stories is because it's all so segmented. After all, the devs have to cater to both gameplay and story, often reinforcing the former to the detriment of the latter (which is especially bad when the former is tedious and dull). They cut the game in arbitrary sections, following obsolete gaming conventions that SHOULDN'T still be followed.

 

Cutscene/story mode, then exploration mode, talking to townies mode, dungeon mode, combat mode. Some of these, the way they're implemented NOW, hurt storytelling. When in dungeon mode, all odds are off! The protagonist turns into a vicious killer, murdering with impunity - with barely any consequences.

 

"So, you've wiped out this entire mansion? Do you realize what will happen now?"

"Whoops."

"Erm, well. I hope you have a good explanation."

"It was self-defense!"

"Okay, then we'll let you proceed to the next part of the story. This, of course, makes perfectly good sense story-wise."

 

It's things like these, where gameplay suppresses story's voice, that make the story suffer. But that's just one instance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly. That coarse gameplay-area model was fine for basic, early generational games. It is now just archaic and completely transparent to the latest generational gamers (that includes those of us who have lived through the preceeding generations ).

[Cantousent]

I agree with you in principle, Llyranor, but it's a mistake to take your point too far. It should be possible to have great gameplay with a solid story. Nevertheless, the design team should never sacrifice gameplay for story. If the two meet, it should be gameplay that prevails. After all, it's a game.

 

I love a great story. Computer games are a valid vehicle for a great story. ...But a computer game is not a book and a book is not a computer game.

 

I'd also rather see some sort of differentiation between the background story and the story as it unfolds in the game. The background story for many games is solid, even if the game does not really unfold much, or any, of the story during actual gameplay.

 

That brings us to cut-scenes. I've never played a game, even Borringwind, where the player had little or no control over the the next course of action when driving towards the end of the story arc. I don't think we can give the player perfect freedom without destroying the story, at least with the computers we have today. Hell, even PnP games tend to have certain points where the characters are compelled to follow a certain course of action. For example, some fellow might want to play a barmaid in a tavern. That's a valid option, I guess, but it might make for boring sessions and the rest of the gaming group might be a tad resentful.

 

The bottom line with cutscenes is that they actually preserve the all important story in the first place. After all, if the characters can do anything and everything they want, then where is the story anyhow? ...And, as I stated above, the characters can never do anything and everything they want. The barmaid class would make for boring Dungeons and Dragons.

[Magena]

I agree with Eldar.

 

I know that even the advent of "create your own adventure" books made the books often seem not to be as good as they could have been had it just been one contiguous book that was written the way I wanted. :D

 

Guess I need to put that English to work and actually start writing.