Every day movies rely more and more on digital animation and effects, meanwhile video games gain access to higher quality voice-actors and get ever closer to building a bridge over the uncanny valley. As this gap between video games and movies closes, interactivity grows more and more important as a dividing line between the two media. Perhaps my favorite methods of interaction is the player’s ability to alter the story.
As far as I’m aware, player interaction within a game’s story first appeared in PC games, specifically RPG’s. Most notable of these were the D&D based games, such as Baldur’s Gate or Planescape: Torment. These games allowed the player to decide exactly what it was that the main character said. The vast majority of these “dialogue choices” were nothing more than fluff, meaning that they had no impact on quest lines, romances, or the overall game story. However, some choices were meaningful, and capable of changing even the ending a player received. A good example can be found in the Blade Runner video game. As the movie had different endings depending on which cut you saw; the game had multiple endings based upon the choices the player made during the game. These choices never altered the final scene of the game, but they did change whether the main character was actually a robot, or if they even knew what they were.
As the years have passed, developers and writers have honed their craft. Where it was once blindingly obvious what choices would change the story, it has become much more difficult to tell with recent titles (at least on the first time through). Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2, and Dragon Age 2 have taken an interesting turn with letting the player choose the main character’s dialogue (especially for such a formula based developer). Rather than showing you exactly what the character will say, and leaving him unvoiced, in these games the main character has voiced lines, and the player can choose from not only vastly reduced lines (down to 3 on average from 6 or so), but what the player is shown on screen is only an approximation of what the character will actually say. These semi-hidden options work with the voiced dialogue to move the player from being the main character, to being the main character’s director. You can’t choose what your actor will say exactly, but you can guide him along the path you want in order to tell the story you want to tell. In this position the game becomes less about a specific story, and more about the player telling the kind of story they want (which is why I find it so enjoyable with Bioware’s action-hero narratives). It’s a very neat effect, and is something I’ve personally wanted to see happen ever since I was a little kid at the movie theater.
Not all games that offer story interactivity allow control over a character’s dialogue. It is, in fact, more common (among games that let the player change the story) for the player to have only a few chances for this interaction. Nier is one of these games. You can never choose what the main character will say, and for most of the game you have no control over the story. A few times the game gives you a choice as to do something or not, but these are tricks. Known as “but thou must”, these options only allow you to pick one choice. Choosing anything else results in someone saying something similar to, “but though must!” and placing you back at the initial choice. Well hated among video game players, because of the false depth they provide, in certain, very emotional places (the end of Metal Gear Solid 3 comes to mind), they can help enhance a player’s emotional state. Sadly this, proper use, of these false choices is very rare. The power of Nier’s story comes mostly from extremely strong writing, but the few choices it allows within the story, even its “but though must”’s add just the proper amount of player involvement to take complete control of your emotions. By letting you, the player, make these extremely important decisions, it makes their results entirely your own.
These two examples are very different in the amount of control you have in the story, but they are both success stories. Where a video game’s story fails, is when they don’t allow player involvement. The worst thing a game can do is have the player think, “Why can’t I do that?” A good, well-designed game never breaks a player’s sense of freedom and immersion. This is not to say that players should be able to do everything, not even Rockstar (developers of the Grand Theft Auto games) has been able to do that. But if you’re going to block a player’s path, or kill off a character, you have to make it seem like there is no way that they could save them (or get through that path). In the end, video games have less in common with movies and books than you’d think, and more in common with storytelling. A good storyteller adapts their tale to the audience at hand, and a good game conforms to its audience’s expectations.
I always appreciate comments, and criticism. Especially criticism. So please, let me know if there's anything I can do better, or that you want to hear about. Leave a comment here, contact me by e-mail, or send a tweet @Corynrags.
As far as I’m aware, player interaction within a game’s story first appeared in PC games, specifically RPG’s. Most notable of these were the D&D based games, such as Baldur’s Gate or Planescape: Torment. These games allowed the player to decide exactly what it was that the main character said. The vast majority of these “dialogue choices” were nothing more than fluff, meaning that they had no impact on quest lines, romances, or the overall game story. However, some choices were meaningful, and capable of changing even the ending a player received. A good example can be found in the Blade Runner video game. As the movie had different endings depending on which cut you saw; the game had multiple endings based upon the choices the player made during the game. These choices never altered the final scene of the game, but they did change whether the main character was actually a robot, or if they even knew what they were.
As the years have passed, developers and writers have honed their craft. Where it was once blindingly obvious what choices would change the story, it has become much more difficult to tell with recent titles (at least on the first time through). Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2, and Dragon Age 2 have taken an interesting turn with letting the player choose the main character’s dialogue (especially for such a formula based developer). Rather than showing you exactly what the character will say, and leaving him unvoiced, in these games the main character has voiced lines, and the player can choose from not only vastly reduced lines (down to 3 on average from 6 or so), but what the player is shown on screen is only an approximation of what the character will actually say. These semi-hidden options work with the voiced dialogue to move the player from being the main character, to being the main character’s director. You can’t choose what your actor will say exactly, but you can guide him along the path you want in order to tell the story you want to tell. In this position the game becomes less about a specific story, and more about the player telling the kind of story they want (which is why I find it so enjoyable with Bioware’s action-hero narratives). It’s a very neat effect, and is something I’ve personally wanted to see happen ever since I was a little kid at the movie theater.
Not all games that offer story interactivity allow control over a character’s dialogue. It is, in fact, more common (among games that let the player change the story) for the player to have only a few chances for this interaction. Nier is one of these games. You can never choose what the main character will say, and for most of the game you have no control over the story. A few times the game gives you a choice as to do something or not, but these are tricks. Known as “but thou must”, these options only allow you to pick one choice. Choosing anything else results in someone saying something similar to, “but though must!” and placing you back at the initial choice. Well hated among video game players, because of the false depth they provide, in certain, very emotional places (the end of Metal Gear Solid 3 comes to mind), they can help enhance a player’s emotional state. Sadly this, proper use, of these false choices is very rare. The power of Nier’s story comes mostly from extremely strong writing, but the few choices it allows within the story, even its “but though must”’s add just the proper amount of player involvement to take complete control of your emotions. By letting you, the player, make these extremely important decisions, it makes their results entirely your own.
These two examples are very different in the amount of control you have in the story, but they are both success stories. Where a video game’s story fails, is when they don’t allow player involvement. The worst thing a game can do is have the player think, “Why can’t I do that?” A good, well-designed game never breaks a player’s sense of freedom and immersion. This is not to say that players should be able to do everything, not even Rockstar (developers of the Grand Theft Auto games) has been able to do that. But if you’re going to block a player’s path, or kill off a character, you have to make it seem like there is no way that they could save them (or get through that path). In the end, video games have less in common with movies and books than you’d think, and more in common with storytelling. A good storyteller adapts their tale to the audience at hand, and a good game conforms to its audience’s expectations.
I always appreciate comments, and criticism. Especially criticism. So please, let me know if there's anything I can do better, or that you want to hear about. Leave a comment here, contact me by e-mail, or send a tweet @Corynrags.
No comments:
Post a Comment