I'm a bit stuck here. Writing a story for a game is not the same as writing a novel. In a novel, you can force the main character to do anything. But in a game, the main character is in control of the player, and you don't want to force them. Ok, let's say the story is a cliche... young peasant boy saves his village from doom and his talent gets discovered by a wizard who sends him on a quest to fulfill the Prophecy that says he will save the world. Why would the peasant boy believe the wizard? Why would he want to go with him? Why would he want to save the world? Maybe he just wants to herd some sheep in the meadow and sleep all day. Or maybe he wants to be a thief and a gambler. Why would the player even care about the peasant boy, the village in peril, or the old wizard? The point is, games often force you into a path instead of making it your own choice to do so. So how could you open a game in such a way that the player will feel compelled to explore/work towards the goal without giving them the feeling that they're being forced? The only ideas that come to mind are things like murder mysteries, where your curiosity is what keeps you asking questions. But in a thing like a murder mystery, the main character is actually in the background. They real main character is the murderer. It's all about what they did, not what the player does. So, how do you make the player feel like a God? How do you write a game story that gives the player the feeling that everything happens because they willed it so, rather than them watching an interactive movie? I know it's a bit of a broad question, but your thoughts would be much appreciated. Solaria

To me, the obvious answer would be to give the player the actual choice to either pursue a goal or not. I wish we had more of that than Crysis-level graphics.

The first thing that comes to mind is the typical "sandbox" type games, where the player is presented with the story and if they wish to pursue a task they need to find and talk to some npc. Meanwhile they can sit and herd sheep or wander through the flowers all they like.

Short of that, I would not know. But I'm a coder not a writer, so that's not my job! :D

Bribes - If you do this, you can get the special whatsits that you need to do what you really want to do. Appeals to pathos - oh the poor damsel in distress needs your help! Flattery - Only you can prevent forest fires save the world.

[Edited by - sunandshadow on November 26, 2007 5:38:50 PM]

You have to have some belief in both the player, and the story itself.

The player is playing your game because they chose to. They'll play the role they're given until what occurs in the story fails to compel them.

At the same time, you owe it to the player to deliver on the implicit promise you've made them. I think that's where the answer to your question lies.

You can't force the player to do anything outside of a cutscene, but you usually have the advantage of a player that's been trained by numerous other games to "hunt the foozle," regardless of their motivation.

Thanks for your thoughts!

bdoskocil - I, too, wish more games would give you choices (intelligent ones) rather than focus on graphics. But ultimately, graphics sell. *sigh* It's kinda sad.

instinKt - What you say makes sense. I like sandbox games, like GTA. I guess eventually the player would get bored of herding sheep and ask the wizard to take him with him. Or they would stop playing the game, because they're bored. >.> But at least it gives you the freedom of choice.

sunandshadow - I like your thinking! It made me think along the lines of "dangle the carrot". If the wizard, instead of saying "you must save the world" says, "the king will give you 10 million gold and his beautiful daughter if you save the world" that might help motivate someone! ^_~

Beige - That also makes sense. I think a lot of people buy games to play the stories. I mean, I loved Final Fantasy 8, and that pretty much doesn't give you any choice whatsoever (story-wise) but it was still fun!

However, the question I'm trying to ask is more... how do you write a story in a way that the player feels they are in control of it, even if they aren't?

Any more ideas welcome! But you guys have helped get my brain ticking - thanks!! ^_^

Solaria

Oh, that one's easy.

Give them choices that are well-crafted, interesting, and mean little to nothing in the grand course of the plot you've created. The illusion will persist through a single playthrough, and possibly more depending on how much time you want to spend branching the dialogue choices and creating gameplay content to support them.

Dialogue tree games do that one all the time. Several answers, leading to the same point.

As long as we are talking about games as opposed to interactive fiction, players will do what they are supposed to because the game rules dictate that they must.

When you play Monopoly with your friends and family, you commit to playing by the rules of the game system. When you play in a pure sandbox environment, then imo, you're not playing a game. But that doesnt necessarily diminish the experience or make it any less entertaining or fun.

A true metaverse is one where there are rules for operating within the verse, but where players are never compelled to persue any goals because there are none. There is no story either. You can create a history and NPC's with desires and motivations, but the players are free to decide if they want to allow "evil" NPC's to take over and change the nature of the verse or take steps to preserve/protect the verse against certain forces.

In general, you're not going to wind up with any 100% apathetic players who are content to be ruled over in every aspect by other players or NPCs. Players strive to achieve some degree of power or control over their situation. Maybe your player does want to sleep amongst his flock of sheep all day, but what happens when wolves start to kill off his sheep 1 by 1? Or what happens when another player decides he wants those sheep so he can take them to slaughter for some quick cash? At some point if the player wants to be a sheep boy, he's got to fight or hire someone else to fight for him... perhaps lobby the mayor or governor or townsfolk that something must be done...

The challenge to designing these sorts of systems has always been to provide enough capability to the individual players to allow them employ the types of solutions to problems as they see fit... where player solutions are emergent and unpredictable.

Problem with sandbox games is that while they do allow the player to make choices for his character, they also make the entire world revolving around the character. In a sandbox game, a farmboy can choose to ignore the wizard, go on to herd sheeps, get bored, become a warrior and slay a dragon. And then he can still return back to his village, find the wizard he ignored (for years?) still leaning on his staff next to a barn, and take him up on his offer. Or, in the middle of saving-the-world business, he becomes bored and chooses to go fishing while his enemies sit tight and eagerly await his return.

Sandbox games allow a character to do what he wants, but they also put the rest of the world on pause until the character choses to interact with them. From experience, that actually reduces the entire game atmosphere and "feel" of the fictional world, rather than enhancing it.

Like novels, many games actually tell a story. I don't think that linearity is something to run away from, even if it does limit the choices players can make. Allowing the player to do anything in a fictional world just takes the spotlight away from the story. You don't want that when you have a good fictional setting and a good story behind the game.

Just as an example from a personal experience, I've cheated my way through Baldur's Gate 2 first time just to walk through the storyline and see how it ends up. I've regretted it ever since, as playing it properly several times after just didn't have the same charm to it. But I certainly didn't need entire Faerun (BG's fictional world) modelled to detail to enjoy it.

Bottom line is - the player and his ingame character are not the same person. It's virtually impossible to allow a player to express his own personality fully in a game. Attempting that will just result in everything seeming limited and lacking of effect. Afterall, you cannot base any single story around an unpredictable character - at least not in a way that the story makes sense and is consistent with the character. Ultimately, a player is not "forced" into a story - if the story and overall setting are good, he will be willingly pulled inside it.

Thanks guys! I appreciate your feedback! Yum yum, brain food.

I'm probably going to go for the "survival" tactic, where the PC can't live unless he fulfills a few tasks, and during that time he'll have the opportunity to make friends, which can then help propel the storyline that follows. ^_^

Solaria