'The Role we don't play' Opinion piece from the Codex

[Gromnir]

am aware that rp is feeling picked 'pon at the moment, so we gives some help.

 

define story

 

is not so easy as rp assumes. plot= story? no writer is gonna assume such a thing. use websters not gonna help you on this one. flawed definition leads to understandable busted notion o' narrative. if story is simply the straightforward chronological revealing o' plot to audience throughs a chosen narrator, then is easy to see how a limited notion o' narrative results.

 

something to consider...

 

ever heard o' the thieves world books? back in the 80s and 90s numerous publishers o' fantasy lit released collections o' short stories. a dozen authors would write short stories that all were set in roughly same universe. thieves world were most successful o' the bunch. dozens o' authors contributed to multiple thieves world books. there were sharing of characters and events 'tween writers. heck, there were even a kinda rough unified plot being advanced in a chronological manner, 'cause there were specific plot events and characters that were seemingly sacrosanct to all contributors. were nothing actually experimental 'bout thieves world... nothing wacky or far-fetched.

 

maybe you get some notions how thieves world model might translate to a video game in which developers were focused on storytelling. heck, sounds kinda familiar.

 

*shrug*

 

tangent: we does suggest reading the liavek collections. a very diverse group o

Edited March 30, 2007 by Gromnir

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I didn't read it all (it's too big to read in front of a computer screen), so if I say something irrelevant, please ignore me.

 

Wouldn't common sense dictate that, if you didn't read it all then you probably should before making any comment?

 

He seems to believe that role-playing and storytelling are contradictory while I think that are in basis the same thing.

 

Appearances can be deceiving, specially when I actually gave some suggestions that in my opinion would improve storytelling. I also took no issue against storytelling itself, but how it can under certain circumstances take role-playing away.

 

Another thing he doesn't appear to understand (even though he mentions it) is that we are talking about a video game. There is no actual GM to hear what the player wants to do and create the story so that it affects the player in a way he wants to. When a designer makes a video game he is bound (in order to make something interesting for me to play) to have a story (before he releases the game). The designer cannot read our minds and create things what we would personally like to do in a game. They have to make one thing for everyone.

 

And this is relevant how? I pointed this out myself several times in the article and besides, I took no specific or important issues with this.

Edited March 30, 2007 by Role-Player

[Diogo Ribeiro]

am aware that rp is feeling picked 'pon at the moment, so we gives some help.

 

define story

 

is not so easy as rp assumes. plot= story? no writer is gonna assume such a thing. use websters not gonna help you on this one. flawed definition leads to understandable busted notion o' narrative. if story is simply the straightforward chronological revealing o' plot to audience throughs a chosen narrator, then is easy to see how a limited notion o' narrative results.

 

I didn't assume it was easy... Nor entirely correct. In fact, I believe I established during the article what I perceived to be narrative though offhand, can't recall if I gave any insight into what I believed to be 'story' but at no time was I expecting it to be beyond reproach. But do you disagree with how I categorized narrative?

 

 

tangent: we does suggest reading the liavek collections. a very diverse group o

[Istima Loke]

I read it quite fast.

 

The point is that there can be no game that would satisfy everyone. A developer cannot think of all the possible tasks one may wish to make, therefore by default there can be no game that has actual roleplaying but just an illusion of it. That leads to my next point that says that to roleplay you must pretend the world exists more than it actually does.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

A developer cannot think of all the possible tasks one may wish to make, therefore by default there can be no game that has actual roleplaying but just an illusion of it.

 

Limits to role-playing are not the same as an absence of it. Conceptually, Pen and Paper has no limits to role-playing but not all role-playing is possible depending on a number of factors, including the type of Game Master running the session. Likewise, role-playing in computer role-playing games is possible but on a much lesser degree to what PnP would allow for. This doesn't mean there's none to be had - simply, that there are several things that attempt to give the role a tighter focus - one of them the attempt to tell a story.

 

Then again, this is a non-issue in the article. I never criticized computer role-playing games telling stories, only telling stories as if videogames were movies.

[Joseph Bulock]

Maybe you should define how you think narrative plays out in a standard game, and how you think it should, and perhaps cite examples. This was the largest flaw in your article. Lots of rhetoric and psuedo-theory without any substantive evidence.

 

And not to beat a dead horse, but I wonder at your idea of role-playing.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

It makes a lot of jumps in logic and makes very one dimensional comparisons between video games and cinema. It assumes that because movie adaptations of games tend to work differently than the games themselves, that it is the games that have flaws in their narrative structure. This is an incredibly poor argument, and he never explores it in any manner that could be called intelligent.

 

That's without even mentioning anything about his serious lack of knowledge in regards to programming, especially in regards to natural language parsers and such.

[J.E. Sawyer]

This is coming from a site that makes fake interviews and fake game pics to promote their narrow-minded agenda. Why should they have any level of credibility?

If a madman says that 2+2=4, it's no less true because the speaker is mad.

[Blank]

He just wants a new genre. The current genre has the player role-playing a character that is more or less already defined by the conditional scripts in place. I happen to like that interaction. It's not completely sandbox role-playing, but that type of game would be impossible to make at this stage. I mean, you can't type in a phrase for your character to yell and have the npc's interact in a fashion that you'd expect them to, Or start doing cartwheels on top of concession stands and expect npc's to react correctly. The current genre entertains me because it's like I am controlling a character in a movie, and though it is limited in some ways, it is enough for me.

[Spider]

I thought there were some interesting ideas in there. And some of the issues he brings up certainly is food for discussion. While I may not agree with all the assumptions or conclusions, it's still worth thinking about.

 

My main problem with the article is the way that it's written. It's very long for an editorial piece and it reads very dense. Role-Player, you have a tendency to stuff the text with "fancy" words. While those do a great job of showcasing your vocabulary and eloquence, they do little for the readability of the piece (I am guilty of this quite a lot myself, by the way). Also, you tend to be somewhat repetitive, repeating the same argument throughout the text. I am certain you could edit the article to be about 50-66% of it's current length without losing any of your actual argumentation. Possibly even less if only the spirit of the piece is what matters.

 

The way it currently is will only lead to more people taking the approach of Istima Loke, glancing through it, or maybe only read the first part. This is the internet, after all. While people may not be stupid (well, some are) they are typically impatient. Of course, if the codexers are your intended audience, maybe that's how they prefer to read things. I'm sure you have a better grasps of their tastes than I do.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

[quote name='

[Llyranor]

RP and I had this discussion almost two years ago, and some themes and gripes are recurring. Heh.

http://forums.obsidianent.com/index.php?sh...mp;#entry401563

 

In summary, gameplay-storytelling segmentation bad. Player as active participant (roleplaying *within* storytelling context) good. PnP may be the ultimate player-driven medium, but CRPGs have the advantage of being to provide a structured approach to its interactive storytelling, effectively 'merging' multiple types of medium into one, all while retaining its own unique advantages. In that sense, contrary to what part of RP's article says, I *want* narrative in my CRPGs, but that doesn't mean any less that I want to be an active participant in said narrative. What I don't want, though, is a second-rate PnP emulator.

 

I wouldn't have enjoyed PST and KOTOR2 as much if they didn't have their own storytelling to share, all while giving the player the (limited) (illusion) opportunity to make meaningful decisions, even if it didn't always lead to largely different consequences. Fallout also isn't by any stretch of the imagination my ultimate vision of what a CRPG should be. If anything, the two previous examples were heading in the right direction. NWN2 was somewhat of a disappointment for being a step-back-ish. Maybe MCA not being Lead had something to do with it. Props to JE for trying to keep things running smoothly near the end, but I'm looking forward to see what he can pull off as Lead (though I'd imagine quite different priorities, which aren't necessarily a bad thing from what I've seen).

[Diogo Ribeiro]

[quote name='

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I thought there were some interesting ideas in there. And some of the issues he brings up certainly is food for discussion. While I may not agree with all the assumptions or conclusions, it's still worth thinking about.

 

But being positive about the article, even if slightly, can only spell doom for you!

 

My main problem with the article is the way that it's written. It's very long for an editorial piece and it reads very dense. Role-Player, you have a tendency to stuff the text with "fancy" words. While those do a great job of showcasing your vocabulary and eloquence, they do little for the readability of the piece (I am guilty of this quite a lot myself, by the way). Also, you tend to be somewhat repetitive, repeating the same argument throughout the text. I am certain you could edit the article to be about 50-66% of it's current length without losing any of your actual argumentation. Possibly even less if only the spirit of the piece is what matters.

 

I'm not sure my vocabulary is something worthy of showcasing, honestly. I think it's pretty limited and prone to many problems that non English-speaking people have to face, such as expression problems. I try to be as clear as possible which may often seem like I'm "strutting my stuff" but it's far from my intention.

 

Eloquent... Far more worse at that

 

The piece's length and repetitive nature, and a lack of a revision - totally my fault though.

 

The way it currently is will only lead to more people taking the approach of Istima Loke, glancing through it, or maybe only read the first part. This is the internet, after all. While people may not be stupid (well, some are) they are typically impatient. Of course, if the codexers are your intended audience, maybe that's how they prefer to read things. I'm sure you have a better grasps of their tastes than I do.

 

I wasn't trying to aim at any specific audience. Sure, there are Codex regulars I'd have to think about but nothing in the article was written to please them. If anything, I wanted to share it with as many people as possible since the intention behind the article was to bring up discussion on the subject matter everywhere I could.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

[quote name='

[Spider]

Well, I can take a little doom. Fact of the matter is that I personally hate cut scenes, so everything that criticizes them has my support almost by default. Again, I may not agree with all of your reasoning, but I do believe that cut scenes are bad. Forcing me to watch the game rather than play it can be beyond frustrating. Especially so if after the cut scene is finished I die and is forced to reload and sit through the whole thing again. If cut scenes are to be included, they must at the very least be skipable. Anyone who has played FFX can attest to this, I'm sure.

 

As for your vocabulary and use of language, I think you're a bit too modest. I definitely didn't think you were from a non-English speaking country. Your grasp of grammar and of the language as a whole seemed fine to me (although I am not natively English-speaking myself, but I do think I'm pretty good at it). If various internet fora are anything to go by, there are certainly English speakers who are considerably worse.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

RP and I had this discussion almost two years ago, and some themes and gripes are recurring. Heh.

http://forums.obsidianent.com/index.php?sh...mp;#entry401563

 

In summary, gameplay-storytelling segmentation bad. Player as active participant (roleplaying *within* storytelling context) good. PnP may be the ultimate player-driven medium, but CRPGs have the advantage of being to provide a structured approach to its interactive storytelling, effectively 'merging' multiple types of medium into one, all while retaining its own unique advantages. In that sense, contrary to what part of RP's article says, I *want* narrative in my CRPGs, but that doesn't mean any less that I want to be an active participant in said narrative. What I don't want, though, is a second-rate PnP emulator.

 

I wouldn't have enjoyed PST and KOTOR2 as much if they didn't have their own storytelling to share, all while giving the player the (limited) (illusion) opportunity to make meaningful decisions, even if it didn't always lead to largely different consequences. Fallout also isn't by any stretch of the imagination my ultimate vision of what a CRPG should be. If anything, the two previous examples were heading in the right direction. NWN2 was somewhat of a disappointment for being a step-back-ish. Maybe MCA not being Lead had something to do with it. Props to JE for trying to keep things running smoothly near the end, but I'm looking forward to see what he can pull off as Lead (though I'd imagine quite different priorities, which aren't necessarily a bad thing from what I've seen).

 

Ah ha, good thread. Great times :D

 

The problem, it seems, is that people mistook criticism against agency removing segments as jabs at storytelling. Putting it bluntly, that's a stupid thing to do because it not only misses the entire point of the article, it also leads me to believe people think story=cutscenes. One of the criticisms I make is that I don't enjoy how storytelling is often portrayed by the whims of the designer instead of exclusively by the player's actions. This doesn't mean I'm against story, it means I'm against at how it's handled nowadays. This also doesn't mean I only want a kind of sandbox design (although I can say it would be my favorite method) and don't enjoy more focused storytelling - it means I want to be in control of my character and not to have control removed. The designer is great in placing a story and a gameworld for me to interact with. That's fine, but I'd prefer it was kept at that.

[Llyranor]

Incidentally, some of my favorite moments in gaming storytelling have been on the grand scheme of things fairly linear, yet they provided the player with just another input that it wasn't just another cutscene.

 

Eg. PST spoilers

Going through the Zerthimon circle with Dak'kon, convo with Ravel, confrontation with the previous incarnations, the whole 'Don't trust the skull' incident.

They may have had slightly diverging pathways, but I always went through mostly the same path every time, because it was MY path. Those really showcase the power of interactive storyteling within a structured format for me.

 

KOTOR2 spoilers

The teachings of Kreia were great, but I also like Kreia's character, so it could have been hit or miss. I also quite liked the initial confrontation with Atris (which was a fairly prolonged dialogue). It was pretty linear, but I had a lot of fun justifying my past actions. Again, MY path.

 

 

I can't for the life of me think of any memorable example from any Troika or Bioware game, or Fallout. Though, I guess killing Drizzt was pretty, er, memorable.

Edited March 30, 2007 by Llyranor

[Sand]

Fallout, Arcanum, Baldur

Edited March 30, 2007 by Sand

[Llyranor]

You're right, design concepts that are 10 yrs old can't be reproduced anymore, what with the apocalypse and fall of civilization and all. Stupid technology.

[Sand]

Its not matter of reproducing, its a matter of profitability. Some of you guys seem to forget that the gaming Industry is in fact an industry whose purpose is to be profitable.

Edited March 30, 2007 by Sand

[Llyranor]

Mainstream isn't the only pathway to profitability.

 

This is what a game released in 2006 looks like. Extremely niche games get made.

Edited March 30, 2007 by Llyranor

[Sand]

Ah, yes, but we are talking about CRPG triple A titles from a major developers and publishers. Companies that invest millions of dollars in development and marketing. Games that not only be on the PC but also on the current generation of consoles. Not independents. Tell me, how well do you think that game with those graphics would sell on the X Box 360 or PS3?

 

I never even heard of Harpoon 3, nor Harpoon 2 or 1.

Edited March 30, 2007 by Sand

[Joseph Bulock]

Already done so in the article, in the “Against Narrative” field. Or are you looking for something more indepth?

 

By asking you to do so, I was asking for a more coherent and clear definition, because the one the article fails to actually clarify what it defines as narrative and the structure of narrative.

 

Also done in the article, in the last three fields of classification titled “Player Meets...”, just prior to the conclusion. Each of them exposes suggestions on how I think it should as well as the positives (and even the negatives!) of these approaches, and there are certainly examples of games where I believe this works and others where I think it doesn’t.

 

They seem more like shallow examinations of three perceived methods used by developers, abounding with many empty comments and bold statements without any substance behind them. For example, You claim that game developers attempt to make games as movie, but fail to understand the strengths and techniques of the cinema, and at the same time doing injustice to the workings and strengths of interactive media. Cite a few examples of how this is occurs, or where you perceive that the failings are most visible. Don't just tell me that games are movie so game that feel to much like movies are bad.

 

The largest flaw which I just presented to be non-existant? Disagreeing with my evidences does not mean they’re not there.

 

You did nothing to prove that any of the flaws were non-existent. There is no substantive evidence cited.

 

And not to beat a dead horse, but I wonder if you actually read the article.

 

Insulting a reader that disagrees with you does not strengthen your position, no matter how many times you do it. The fact that many people on this board are missing what you claim to be the point of your article is probably pointing to a failure in the writing and not the readers.

[Gromnir]

This is coming from a site that makes fake interviews and fake game pics to promote their narrow-minded agenda. Why should they have any level of credibility?

If a madman says that 2+2=4, it's no less true because the speaker is mad.

 

 

true enough... which is why Gromnir don't dismiss all vol posts out of hand.

 

however, from a practical pov, if a person don't know what is total of 2+2, and vol claims answer is 4, but josh or eldar or some random sane person claims answer is 5, then we can understand why maybe some people would rely 'pon josh or eldar or sane person answer, the wrong answer.

 

again, the problem with codex madness is that there is codex dogma. spend 15 minutes reading codex editorials or news bites and you gots a pretty good notion o' what is codex dogma. ever listen to religious experts makes scientific arguments 'gainst evolution? is same kinda madness you see from codex, 'cause 'stead o' coming to conclusion based on evidence, the worshiper o' dogma starts with a conclusion, then works backwards... highlighting only those bits o' evidence that woulds possibly seem to undermine evolution's viability. heck, Gromnir even concedes the possibility that evolution is flawed, but the way a dogma inspired disciple gets to that conclusion makes Gromnir wanna knee-jerk to opposite conclusion... much as it is easy to knee-jerk opposite o' vol and codex and other mad peoples.

 

HA! Good Fun!