Hey gang, What follows is the "Conceptual Introduction" and "High Level World Concept" for the title Loner. My concerns for which I'd like feedback appear after that. (Paragraph formatting/indentation doesn't work when posting, so indenting is done with "___") ----begin document---- Conceptual Introduction ___ Loner is a first-person perspective action-adventure RPG for the PC that allows players to follow the pursuits of an asset recovery specialist (i.e., "repo man") that recovers the wrong vehicle. ___ After what appears to be a deadly terrorist attack during political tension between The United States and Mexico, the player becomes a prime suspect and will seek refuge south of the border while attempting to uncover corruption and prove his innocence. High Level World Concept ___ In the year 2009, Canada, The United States, and Mexico will agree upon a North American Union proposal in an effort to increase North America's prowess in the global market, just as the European Union had done in 1992. To The United States and Mexico, the North American Union (NAU) is also an opportunity to legitimize each country's dependence upon the illegal immigration that silently sustains their economies. Amidst the outcry of such groups as the U.S.'s Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, and Mexico's Zapatista Army of National Liberation, an open border policy is initiated under the NAU. ___ While the allowance of free enterprise throughout all three countries lowers unemployment rates and stimulates record market growth, the social ramifications of legislating heterogeneity among people with vastly different cultures soon becomes apparent. Violence along the U.S.-Mexican border is quite common. Businesses started by foreigners within NAU sanctions are often sabotaged. Larger corporations, now dependent upon a migrant labor model, sustain significant losses as nationalists threaten the foreign workforce. And the rest of the world skeptically watches on, eventually dubbing the proposal "Imperialism in Disguise". The once-glorious vision of a North American Union is quickly tarnished by its gross shortcomings. ___ With the violence mounting and the economy faltering, the NAU starts to collapse. In attempt to quell global concerns about the state of the NAU, the open border policy is hastily retracted in the year 2012. The weeks following the border re-closing are tense as NAU Council Members begin drafting amendments to remedy the crisis. But a remedy does not come soon enough. ___ The Player Character, an asset recovery specialist (i.e., "repo" man), finds himself at the center of the NAU turmoil after a routine vehicle recovery goes awry; the vehicle contains explosives that cause a fatal blast, and is immediately interpreted as a Mexican terrorist attack resulting from ill will over the border re-closing. The Player Character, now a prime suspect, seeks refuge in Mexico, away from U.S. Federal jurisdiction, while trying to prove his innocence. But the Player Character begins uncovering the real truth behind the NAU-- In a nexus of corporate and political corruption stretching from the northern reaches of Canada to the Yucatan territory of Mexico, the pieces must be assembled. ----end document---- Specifically, I'm concerned about 2 things: 1) the mentioning of "Civil Defense Corps" & "Zapatista Army" (high level world concept, paragraph #1) may be too proper (as in proper names) for a "high level" concept. There are other groups/factions that are critical to the story, so mentioning only these 2 is perhaps misleading. 2) the line, "the pieces must be assembled" (high level world concept, paragraph #4 (final paragraph)), was just a placeholder line for further refinement. But I'm suffering bad writer's block. I don't want to reiterate what's already been said in the conceptual intro ("uncover corruption and prove his innocence") Much thanks for reading, and even more thanks for any comments/feedback. :) Regards, [Edited by - Razorguts on February 11, 2006 3:29:25 PM]

The "world concept" is about 4 times longer than the "conceptual introduction": I think you have a priority problem.
I would rather flesh out the story, what the character is going to do and how, and his personality, than worry about details of document text.
For example, would there be a lot of fighting and violence? How can our hero believably present evidence to a corrupted evil government in another country? Why does the government believe he is a bomber, and why does our hero trust the system enough to seek evidence but not enough to stay in the U.S. and sort it out? Are the car bombers, the enemy of the hero's enemy, allies or villains? How does Mexico feel about him? Should our hero make a revolution or be restored to his formar place in NAU society? Specifically, what relates the social problem of NAU corruption to the personal problem of mistaken investigation?

Probably you have answers for most of these questions, but they should have been written in the design document before unimportant details of the political situation.

The useful points of the "world concept" are simply that in a near future the U.S./Mexico border becomes open and the two countries more integrated, but just at the time of the game's events there is a serious crisis between the two countries; that an unknown party is probably making car bombs; and that a single web of corporate and political corruption extends over Canada, U.S. and Mexico.
All the rest is meaningless detail: you give names to militias, but even stating they exist requires a justification (for example, that you need evil cannon fodder on both sides of the conflict).

Lorenzo Gatti

I disagree with the above poster, since I think you intended for the conceptual introduction to be something brief that sets the stage; but you still might want to take a more organic approach with it. Start with the character and grow out from the character's perspective as you describe your concept.

Thanks for the feedback, LorenzoGatti. It is much appreciated. :)

Quote:

Original post by LorenzoGatti The "world concept" is about 4 times longer than the "conceptual introduction": I think you have a priority problem. I would rather flesh out the story, what the character is going to do and how, and his personality, than worry about details of document text. For example...[circumstantial questions]...Probably you have answers for most of these questions, but they should have been written in the design document before unimportant details of the political situation.

The concept intro is the very high-level pitch, and is therefore intentionally brief. The world concept here is also high-level and brief.

Indeed, those questions have been answered and well documented. I was hesitant to include the fine details, in lieu of unnecessarily saturating the post. But in addition to the high level world concept is a "world background", a lengthy history leading up to the bombing and the player character's refuge.

A "story introduction" is also documented, which serves as a vehicle for character introduction (written in the 1st-person, and in-game), as well as setting the stage for initial game "missions" and the inciting action (the bombing).

(there are other documents such as core gameplay, features lists, etc., but not directly related to the story overview.)

Quote:

The useful points of the "world concept" are simply that in a near future the U.S./Mexico border becomes open and the two countries more integrated, but just at the time of the game's events there is a serious crisis between the two countries; that an unknown party is probably making car bombs; and that a single web of corporate and political corruption extends over Canada, U.S. and Mexico. All the rest is meaningless detail...

Your interpretation is pretty spot-on, though I had hoped to emphasize the NAU a bit more (as this is not based in fiction, but fact). However, if even this much of the story (points you listed above) is conveyed, then it's enough to lay a foundation and stimulate interest. There is always room for refinement and "trimming", but I'm not sure that all the rest is meaningless detail, as the militia naming is done to imply that there is significant opposition to opening the borders. Which comes to one of my original inquiries - is there a way to imply opposition without naming specific groups?

Thanks again, Lorenzo, for the feedback.

Regards,

Quote:

Original post by Beige I disagree with the above poster, since I think you intended for the conceptual introduction to be something brief that sets the stage; but you still might want to take a more organic approach with it. Start with the character and grow out from the character's perspective as you describe your concept.

Thanks for the input, Beige. :) (I overlooked your post while responding above, sorry for the redundancy)

Yes, the concept intro is intentionally brief. However, for the "quick & dirty" concept pitch, is there actually room to get into character intro? (I'm not being facetious, but honestly posing the question.)

The aforementioned "story intro" (one of the things I didn't post) takes a 1st-person approach for character intro, and reads as if you are the character. It also introduces some of the gameplay mechanics. For example, making reference to emails received, phone calls made, vehicles recovered, etc., implies that the player character is able to read emails, make phone calls, and recover vehicles (which implies several mechanics like lock picking and driving).

I suppose there is some question over the brevity of the concept intro. Most design doc samples I've seen (some for the purpose of educating proper documentation habits) heavily emphasize keeping the concept intro "to the point". So I'm not sure if character introduction is related to an overall concept. It's certainly necessary for story development, but perhaps not for concept description. ?

Thanks again for all the feedback. It truly is appreciated.

Regards,

-Bump- for 1 week and 190+ views. (Also bumping to hopefully initiate further discussion from those that responded.)

Thanks in advance,

There's not much to discuss!

Which is a shame because this idea is interesting, post more about it.

Personally, I feel that there isn't anything wrong with the above outline, other than the fact that it's incomplete (obviously).

It all depends on what you find challenging and enjoyable in story writing.

I'm currently writing an extended storyline that involves world events-- and I want these to be somewhat rooted in reality, so I have to take extra care to construct a lush history an environment without too many "deus ex machina"-type plot devices. I'm putting together a timetable that involves multiple groups of people who represent organizations. Their motives, actions and INTERactions kind of write each other, so there's definitely a process moving from a skeleton of a concept and then putting muscles and flesh on it.

Now, throughout this entire process I've been creating a cast (a few of which existed in some form before I even thought of putting them in this story), and their evolution is kind of on-demand. You might think that this is an easy way to muddy a character with an uncharacteristic trait or role, but this is in fact where the fun comes in. People are sometimes forced to act outside of their tendencies when (maybe traumatic) events out of their control move them to it. As with the events and main players, the cast interact and share of each other, making the process very back-and-forth. Character development is indicative of this. And since you're sticking with the skeleton formula, you only need to give them a simple psychological profile, plop them down in a place and time and the dialogue will write itself.

Plus, you never lose the opportunity to round out the cast this way. If you feel stagnation setting in as your cast acts same-y, you can simply add in more to mix it up. Perhaps they'll be the incidental vital role, changing other characters with one small encounter. Perhaps they'll be the non-threatening comic relief, who neither develops as a character himself nor inspires others to do so. A new character can be a breath of fresh air, or a convenient way to tie things up so you can move on.

Anyway, this is only one way to go about it. It just seemed to me that this is the way you're starting out.

To that end, there are a few things you need to watch. First, you need to know when enough is enough. Your skeleton might get so big that there just isn't enough meat to go around, or you're locking yourself into an epic story. The latter wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that you really can't move ahead until you have most of it laid out. This makes an "episode 1" particularly hard to write for. The second problem is that this style of writing is very susceptible to plot holes-- they'll sit there and fester and you'll want to move away from them for fear of adding an unneccessary plot element. I often find myself in this spot, considering I always need an elaborate reason for everything in my worlds to exist. The only solution is to sit and brainstorm and work it out, work with what you have, even if it means re-writing an entire section. Once, I had to put different dates on my entire time table just for one small historical discrepancy... then I had to change half of my rudimentary elements (props and backdrops, if you will) because the dates didn't jive. Don't ask.

I hope that helped.

Quote:

Original post by Razorguts ___ In the year 2009, Canada, The United States, and Mexico will agree upon a North American Union proposal in an effort to increase North America's prowess in the global market, just as the European Union had done in 1992. To The United States and Mexico, the North American Union (NAU) is also an opportunity to legitimize each country's dependence upon the illegal immigration that silently sustains their economies. Amidst the outcry of such groups as the U.S.'s Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, and Mexico's Zapatista Army of National Liberation, an open border policy is initiated under the NAU.

The EU wasn't necessarily formed to enhance Europe's prowess in the global market as this text implies. NAFTA went into effect in 1994 and hasn't proven very popular or very effective, primarily due to competition from China. It's not clear why the governments of Canada, Mexico and the US would continue to pursue a failed policy - although the notion of government disconnection from the people does go to explaining open revolts.

Quote:

Original post by Razorguts ___ While the allowance of free enterprise throughout all three countries lowers unemployment rates and stimulates record market growth, the social ramifications of legislating heterogeneity among people with vastly different cultures soon becomes apparent. Violence along the U.S.-Mexican border is quite common. Businesses started by foreigners within NAU sanctions are often sabotaged. Larger corporations, now dependent upon a migrant labor model, sustain significant losses as nationalists threaten the foreign workforce. And the rest of the world skeptically watches on, eventually dubbing the proposal "Imperialism in Disguise". The once-glorious vision of a North American Union is quickly tarnished by its gross shortcomings.

If the present economy is any indication, demolished US standards of living resulting from "race to the bottom" wages could go to explaining open revolt in the US and a strong xenophobic response - even though Mexican culture isn't actually "vastly different" from American culture - the language difference presents a barrier. The transition of the American middle class to migrant labor wouldn't be an easy one. Legislated heterogeneity would have to come at the end of a bayonet - and so probably wouldn't be undertaken overtly.

Quote:

Original post by Razorguts 1) the mentioning of "Civil Defense Corps" & "Zapatista Army" (high level world concept, paragraph #1) may be too proper (as in proper names) for a "high level" concept. There are other groups/factions that are critical to the story, so mentioning only these 2 is perhaps misleading.

Don't forget the drug gangs, MS-13, the Zeta's, not to mention rogue elements of the Mexican army (and for that matter under such a collapse the US army and Marines) - and rogue police forces of various US cities, like Los Angeles, and of course US street gangs - Crips, Bloods, Aryan Nation.