I thought your list of "things players like to decide" was so spot-on there isn't really anything for me to add to it [smile].

Quote:

Original post by sunandshadow Well, my opinion, as I have said before but maybe not in this thread, is that to be psychologically satisfying a story must have plot structure, including closure. If you want to make an unending story that's fine, but at least make it episodic so that each chunk of the story has some closure. Have you read the current thread in the writing forum where I talk about what plot is and how to create it? I'm thinking of writing a few paragraphs on branching plots next if anyone's interested.

I'm of this opinion too. Just having interactive choices isn't quite enough; the choices must be framed within the structure of a story. However, I find it very hard to succinctly define exactly what "story structure" is; there seems to be implicit rules that stories take that define it's "storyness" that we've all come to subconciously understand from the stories we've read and seen. I think when I attempt to implement interactive storytelling in a game I'll have to closely match a well-defined story domain to ensure that the result is a story (this is another reason why I think the result will end up cliche, though).

I'd like to read your advice on branching plots, sunandshadow, either here on over in the writing forum. I was planning on asking a question on how to write interactive plots sometime soon, as I'm not sure on the best way a writer can express a myriad of plot paths; all the standard writing techniques seem to be geared to linear writing.

Quote:

Original post by Beige So, if players like to be able to decide those things, how does that translate into the dynamic creation of an experience the player enjoys?

There's a few ways interactive storytelling techniques could help with all of the things on sunandshadow's list. Here's a few that spring to my mind:

Quote:

Original post by sunandshadow Goals - presented with a whole new fictional world, players like to acquire interesting objects, court/befriend interesting NPCs, investigate interesting mysteries.

If elements of the construction of the world are left to the storytelling engine, the system can ensure that there's always a suite of interesting stuff for for the player to find and explore (i.e. elimintating "dead time" where the story-world offers nothing to the player).

Quote:

Strategy - players like to think of clever plans for achieving their goals.

With a more dynamic system, it would be open to multiple paths for solving a single problem. This would be especially true with a good character model if the goal involves gaining the favour of NPCs. This one can also be achieved with a simulation world (where the world is defined with by a set of physical laws), but an interactive storytelling system should be able to cope with multiple approaches to a single problem (otherwise there would be no player choice, hence no interactivity).

Quote:

Aesthetics - players like to choose how their avatars and their avatars' posessions (skin, hair, eyes, gender, body type, clothing, weapons, armor, house, pets, livestock, etc.) look.

Modifying aesthetics is already in many RPGs, but with interactive storytelling it could be made to have a stronger influence.

Quote:

Personality/Attitude - affecting all of the above categories, players want their avatar not just to do the right things, but to do them in the right way, for the right reasons. This includes choosing which political/moral agendas the player wants to support, designing appearance to have psychological impact on NPCs, and especially using dialogue choices to have a psychological impact on NPCs. Players also like to have their personality be recognized and acknowledged by the game, for example by being awarded a corresponding title/nickname/heroic epithet.

This is probably the most important aspect that interactive storytelling could deal with; allowing the system to cope with the player's choice of personality or agenda, and having it acknowledged by the game is the core of my approach towards the problem.

Quote:

Original post by Trapper Zoid However, I find it very hard to succinctly define exactly what "story structure" is; there seems to be implicit rules that stories take that define it's "storyness" that we've all come to subconciously understand from the stories we've read and seen. I think when I attempt to implement interactive storytelling in a game I'll have to closely match a well-defined story domain to ensure that the result is a story (this is another reason why I think the result will end up cliche, though). I'd like to read your advice on branching plots, sunandshadow, either here on over in the writing forum. I was planning on asking a question on how to write interactive plots sometime soon, as I'm not sure on the best way a writer can express a myriad of plot paths; all the standard writing techniques seem to be geared to linear writing.

Huh, do you think it's that hard to define? I feel like I understand and have adequately defined the principles and elements necessary for a story, but maybe I haven't adequately communicated them in my posts, or maybe you haven't seen some of the relevant posts...? I don't think it's necessary to match a well-defined story domain, although it might be a nice simple place to start. But where I would start is by describing a branching game plot which satisfies my list of player desires (e.g. the one in Xenallure) and work backwards to imagine how it might have been generated.

Anyway, I have to eat some dinner now, I'll write that stuff about branching plots later. Let me know if there are any topics you particularly want me to touch on. [smile]

Quote:

Original post by sunandshadow Huh, do you think it's that hard to define?

I think it's hard for me to define; coming from a programming and science background I'm not sure I have the right vocabulary [smile].

I don't think it's mandatory to start with a well-defined story form, but I think it would be easiest for someone with my objectives. It would depend heavily on the type of story I need to tell, however, which I haven't decided yet (as I'm still trying to find a simple enough domain). If I had a cast of well-defined characters, such as the ones in Xenallure, then working backwards based on that might be a good approach too (and one I haven't considered that much).

One thing I haven't considered yet is how to make it easy for a writer to add content to such a system; I'm starting to think that that might part of the core problem. Manipulating logical symbols at an abstract level isn't how people write stories. There needs to be a simple way for a writer to communicate their ideas through a well-designed interface that respects the way writer's work and think, and which also leads to an interactive story. It might be that the design of the system itself needs to be based on the interface technique.

I dont know if its been mentioned yet but Indigo Prophecy (or Farenheit) is a pretty darn good I.S. game... there are some very cool ideas in there.


#dth-0

Quote:

Original post by Trapper Zoid I think it's hard for me to define; coming from a programming and science background I'm not sure I have the right vocabulary [smile]. I don't think it's mandatory to start with a well-defined story form, but I think it would be easiest for someone with my objectives. It would depend heavily on the type of story I need to tell, however, which I haven't decided yet (as I'm still trying to find a simple enough domain). If I had a cast of well-defined characters, such as the ones in Xenallure, then working backwards based on that might be a good approach too (and one I haven't considered that much).

It sounds like what you are looking for is Vladamir Propp and his structural analysis of the folktale is probably the most well-defined story form.

But that's kind of out of date now, and it would take you a while to read your way from there to modern theories of plot. So I would start at a different place.

To understand the structure of a story, the most basic thing you need to do is see every story as a circle - a journey from a stable situation (story world), which is disturbed by an initial incident, through escalating perturbations, until a climactic resolution re-stabalizes the situation. This is a plot arc, and it can be either a complete story or an episode of a longer story.

A plot arc is story at the lowest level; the next level up is theme. The initial incident poses a thematic question, the rising action argues the possibilities, and the climax decides the argument. This is where memetics come in - a story, as an object, communicates a memetic premise about what the correct conclusion to some particular thematic argument. This is how stories work to teach/persuade their audiences of some moral. Aesop's Fables are particularly clear examples of this mechanism.

Do you understand/agree so far?

Quote:

Original post by sunandshadow It sounds like what you are looking for is Vladamir Propp and his structural analysis of the folktale is probably the most well-defined story form.

Propp's work is a bit too formulaic; good for classifying Russian folktales, but not really suited to anything else. A Propp-like approach might work, if we could find a similiar classification for a game story (frankly, the repetitive plot elements I see in RPGs suggest it wouldn't be that hard [smile]).

Quote:

To understand the structure of a story, the most basic thing you need to do is see every story as a circle - a journey from a stable situation (story world), which is disturbed by an initial incident, through escalating perturbations, until a climactic resolution re-stabalizes the situation. This is a plot arc, and it can be either a complete story or an episode of a longer story.

That's similar the Jungian/Campbell approach, right? The story as a journey. That's the model I'd like to use.

Quote:

A plot arc is story at the lowest level; the next level up is theme. The initial incident poses a thematic question, the rising action argues the possibilities, and the climax decides the argument. This is where memetics come in - a story, as an object, communicates a memetic premise about what the correct conclusion to some particular thematic argument. This is how stories work to teach/persuade their audiences of some moral. Aesop's Fables are particularly clear examples of this mechanism. Do you understand/agree so far?

Yup, understand and agree with that [smile]. Although modelling interactivity with theme and memetics might be a bit too tricky a starting point (at least for me); it might be best to pick a single theme for a story and base the interactivity around that.

Quote:

Original post by Trapper Zoid Propp's work is a bit too formulaic; good for classifying Russian folktales, but not really suited to anything else. A Propp-like approach might work, if we could find a similiar classification for a game story (frankly, the repetitive plot elements I see in RPGs suggest it wouldn't be that hard [smile]).

[sick] There isn't really any such thing as "a game story". You could make a game based on a folktale as easily as any other kind of story. But I don't think looking for a particular type of story to implement is the right idea. The best option is to understand what all stories have in common, which is where I'm trying to go with explaining this stuff. [wink]

Quote:

That's similar the Jungian/Campbell approach, right? The story as a journey. That's the model I'd like to use.

The heroic journey, if that's what you mean, is actually Vogler building on Campbell - I personally can't stand Campbell and don't care much for Vogler either. Or Frey, he's in that camp too. I'm not a big fan of hero/quest stories, and especially not of models of plot that exclude every other type of story. [rolleyes]

Nope, this is my own original theory of plot, containing the best bits from about 50 different sources. [wink] To read about where I got the story-is-a-circle idea, check this journal entry Anyway, my point is that this is "The Sunandshadow Approach" even though it will contain some elements found in various other approaches. This approach includes but is definitely not limited to hero/quest stories.

Quote:

...modelling interactivity with theme and memetics might be a bit too tricky a starting point (at least for me); it might be best to pick a single theme for a story and base the interactivity around that.

I'm not saying it's necessary to model memes, I'm saying that a story is a meme and is interpreted as such by the audience. Transmitting a meme is the purpose/function of a story, and one test of whether a generated story is a good story.

I also think picking a single theme may be a good approach. But that's a hypothesis we want to test, so first we need a sandbox to test it in. So I propose the following thought experiment: we will verbally describe a hypothetical interactive story game, a simplified version of Xenallure.

Let's call this game Island. The game begins by generating an island, let's say it's a square island composed of a 3x3 grid of rooms. The game generates a starting story, populates one or more rooms with objects and NPCs, then places the PC into the first room and delivers to the player the exposition and initial incident so that the player can begin playing the story.

Are we all in agreement that any interactive story game would have to begin something like this? The island could easily be substituted for a castle or a house, or whatever enclosed setting. Optionally the player could be allowed to customize the PC and/or take a personality test and/or pick the story's theme before the game begins. But other than that, can anyone find anything in this beginning that could/should be done differently, or is this the way an interactive story game must begin?

Edit: Oops I spelled Vogler wrong. o.O

[Edited by - sunandshadow on October 28, 2005 4:21:32 PM]

Quote:

Original post by sunandshadow [sick] There isn't really any such thing as "a game story". You could make a game based on a folktale as easily as any other kind of story. But I don't think looking for a particular type of story to implement is the right idea. The best option is to understand what all stories have in common, which is where I'm trying to go with explaining this stuff. [wink]

Oh, but there is such a thing as "a game story"!. That's why you can get sites like The Grand List Of Console Role Playing Game Clichés. For example, if I can play a game like the RPG "Tales of Symphonia", and correctly guess both secret identifies of the character Kratos (which they keep "secret" for about fifty hours of gameplay) there's obviously some rules that go behind game story writing. I've haven't been shocked by a plot twist in a game for years.

I know from a game writer's perspective that isn't really a good thing; RPGs are one of the most cliche forms out there, but that means it's becoming an established genre by itself. But it makes it a lot easier for someone like me who wants to automate these stories in an interactive system.

Quote:

The heroic journey, if that's what you mean, is actually Voegler building on Campbell - I personally can't stand Campbell and don't care much for Voegler either. Or Frey, he's in that camp too. I'm not a big fan of hero/quest stories, and especially not of models of plot that exclude every other type of story. [rolleyes]

I think Campbell built on Jung, and Vogler just translated Campbells work from rambling academic text into English [smile]. I'm not sure if there is a universal theory of plot; they'll always be exceptions. However I'd be happy with a well-defined subset, such as "The Hero's Journey"; there's a lot that can be done with that (if handled correctly).

Quote:

Nope, this is my own original theory of plot, containing the best bits from about 50 different sources. [wink] To read about where I got the story-is-a-circle idea, check this journal entry Anyway, my point is that this is "The Sunandshadow Approach" even though it will contain some elements found in various other approaches. This approach includes but is definitely not limited to hero/quest stories.

I do agree with this model of plot. I think I've heard of the story-as-a-circle idea before; possibly with Jung. It's also part of the concept behind the Fool's story in the Tarot cards, I think.

The problem I have with the more universal theories of plot is that in order to become more broad they also have to become slightly more vague. While great for humans, this makes them a lot harder to translate into predicate logic suitable for entering into a machine. That's the reason why Propp is so beloved of computer scientists; since he managed to represent Russian folk-tales in the form of a grammar, it was written in a language that they understood.

I'll leave the introduction idea for the next post, as it's a good idea to have a common starting framework for discussion.

Quote:

Original post by sunandshadow I also think picking a single theme may be a good approach. But that's a hypothesis we want to test, so first we need a sandbox to test it in. So I propose the following thought experiment: we will verbally describe a hypothetical interactive story game, a simplified version of Xenallure. Let's call this game Island. The game begins by generating an island, let's say it's a square island composed of a 3x3 grid of rooms. The game generates a starting story, populates one or more rooms with objects and NPCs, then places the PC into the first room and delivers to the player the exposition and initial incident so that the player can begin playing the story. Are we all in agreement that any interactive story game would have to begin something like this? The island could easily be substituted for a castle or a house, or whatever enclosed setting. Optionally the player could be allowed to customize the PC and/or take a personality test and/or pick the story's theme before the game begins. But other than that, can anyone find anything in this beginning that could/should be done differently, or is this the way an interactive story game must begin?

With your model, would the island be potentially extended by adding more rooms if necessary?

I agree with starting with a background exposition, the PC (with a set of attributes to define them), a cast of NPCs and possible starting objects. I'm not sure about having a 3x3 grid of rooms; I'd probably abstract the space away to simple "accessable areas" and "non-accessable areas" to be a bit more general. The initial incident would probably happen after a few choices, to give the player some time to adjust themselves to the world and to give the system some time to assess the type of player.