quote: Original post by Crydee
But move more into RPG - is Diabolo FPS or RPG??? - and the need for a good storyline becomes critical IMHO. Kylotan gives examples of games with a good story - Thief etc.. - and there are others. But there are also a lot of games without.

Diablo, to me is a near-perfect blend of ultra-violence and ultra-shopping. It''s little more than Antiques Roadshow with magical medieval weaponry. In fact, I have yet to find any computer-based RPG with any R or P in it, hack and slash is such a better name for these things. And I loved Diablo I, and the second installment was just peachy, but beyond knowing I killed things, I saw no story there. There were no difficult ethical choices: I had to kill Lord Diablo or he would kill everything. I was never presented any choices beyond what weapon I would use to chop off which big bad''s head.

quote: First the "interesting character" has to be made interesting - who does that? Second he / she has to be placed in a context that engages the player - who does that? And finally although the player takes decisions those decisions have to be related to a story of some sort. Obviously the player can stay in one room all the time talking to a table - that''s a decision. Interesting? No.

When has a character in a video game EVER been interesting? I have never had any emotional investment in a video game character, ever. In contrast, I cried when Spock died and my mouth dropped open in shock when Buffy''s mom died last year. The closest a video game has come to pulling a reaction out of anything but my hindbrain is when I kill or slap something around, and it performs a somewhat convincing impression of agony: the yelp of the german shepherds in Wolf3D or the fetal ball assumed by a creature in B&W when you try to beat it to death. But if convincing snuff porn is the best video games will manage, count me out.

quote: That''s not even considering MMORPG''s where I think there will be no progress beyond hack ''n slash until the games have an enveloping story.

So how do you do it? Video games are one part treasure hunt, one part milk run, and one part conflict. Where''s the story? Where''s the personal interaction? What''s the point? And don''t forget that in a MMORPG, you have a huge number of hopeless idiots wandering around the world expecting everyone else to entertain them.

People who think storylines aren''t important in games are the same people who think prettier explosions make a better game. Granted, in many cases a storyline is not a vital part of the ''game'' experience. But I completely disagree with the statement that games are not stories. They are stories in a way that books and movies can never be. They are stories where the player is the author.

We haven''t yet come to the point where game mechanisms allow for the telling of an original story, but we''re getting closer. A lot of interesting research is being done into how to write stories for games, considering the kind of unique difficulties presented by the medium. How do you deal with non-linearity, or multi-linearity? How do you deal with interactivity? Many people mistakenly think that if a game has a story it must me linear. That''s crap. Just because nobody has really paid much attention to creating better tools to allow more compelling stories to be told in games doesn''t mean stories aren''t important.

But, the statement that writers are involved in many games is also true, and in FPS titles to boot. Deus Ex had a professional writer, Sheldon Pacotti, and he''s doing the storyline for the second one as well. Valve brought a cyberpunk author, Marc Laidlaw, onboard to help flesh out Half-Life''s story and make it more interesting. Many RPGs bring on writers to create dialogue and sure, technical writers to produce the manual, but my belief is that the ''next generation'' of gaming will be dominated by the story-driven immersive action simulation, much like Deus Ex was. Take a look at Anarchy Online -- Ragnar Tornquist and a team of writers have penned a *4 year* story arc for that game.

So, get used to the idea. The first generation of computer games was purely text based. The next generation was 2D. Now, we''re in the 3D generation. What do you think will happen when graphics become ''good enough'' for people and they start asking themselves ''what makes this game interesting to me?''. Gameplay and story should not be looked at as independent of one another. Rather, look at the storyline you want to have in a game and ask yourself, ''how can I best tell this story through a game?''.

Just my thoughts on the matter. And yes, I think the IGDA should offer an award for ''best original storyline'' and ''best character dialogue''.

R.

quote: Original post by Tacit
People who think storylines aren''t important in games are the same people who think prettier explosions make a better game.

That''s a positively awful strawman you''ve just thrown out. I''d love to play the computer game from _Ender''s Game_. But right now, all an author can really do is provide color and backstory. While that can be entertaining at times, it''s not strictly necessary for the enjoyment of a game.

quote: Granted, in many cases a storyline is not a vital part of the ''game'' experience. But I completely disagree with the statement that games are not stories. They are stories in a way that books and movies can never be. They are stories where the player is the author.

How am I the author when all I''m really doing is figuring out the pre-destined path that the game designer deigned me to follow? Granted, a good game makes following that path lots of fun, but in every game I''ve played, I''m deeply, deeply constrained to a mostly linear path. Even the best: XCOM, Sundog, and Elite do little more than provide a few more choices as to how one attains their goals. When I can start up a game of Warcraft, decide that I don''t really want either side to win the war, and instead go into the business profiting off misery, then I have freedom. I''ve never changed the overarching goal of any game I''ve played

quote: We haven''t yet come to the point where game mechanisms allow for the telling of an original story, but we''re getting closer. A lot of interesting research is being done into how to write stories for games, considering the kind of unique difficulties presented by the medium. How do you deal with non-linearity, or multi-linearity? How do you deal with interactivity? Many people mistakenly think that if a game has a story it must me linear. That''s crap. Just because nobody has really paid much attention to creating better tools to allow more compelling stories to be told in games doesn''t mean stories aren''t important.

But the problem is that just like the rest of AI in games, we aren''t really doing anything new: we''re just desperately mining the past. Sometimes we''ll hit gems like we did with the A* search algorithm that spawned a 1,000 RTS and FPS games, but a lot of it will be as useless as neural networks, genetic algorithms, and the Tom Barbalets of the world. These all spew great technobabble, but after all the money and time is spent, one has little to show.

quote: But, the statement that writers are involved in many games is also true, and in FPS titles to boot. Deus Ex had a professional writer, Sheldon Pacotti, and he''s doing the storyline for the second one as well. Valve brought a cyberpunk author, Marc Laidlaw, onboard to help flesh out Half-Life''s story and make it more interesting. Many RPGs bring on writers to create dialogue and sure, technical writers to produce the manual, but my belief is that the ''next generation'' of gaming will be dominated by the story-driven immersive action simulation, much like Deus Ex was. Take a look at Anarchy Online -- Ragnar Tornquist and a team of writers have penned a *4 year* story arc for that game.

But this, to me, is more world-building than storytelling. World-building is a great idea, and it''s something many SF authors can do far better than they can tell stories, and that makes for a great fit. The most fun I''ve had with a game in recent memory was _Halo_. The dialog was humorous, and it provided such great vehicle control that the gameplay was truly something new despite its totally linear path. There''s an incredible amount of backstory to _Halo_ and it really shined through in the final product in that it displayed an excellent degree of self-consistency and color in its levels.

quote: So, get used to the idea. The first generation of computer games was purely text based. The next generation was 2D. Now, we''re in the 3D generation. What do you think will happen when graphics become ''good enough'' for people and they start asking themselves ''what makes this game interesting to me?''. Gameplay and story should not be looked at as independent of one another. Rather, look at the storyline you want to have in a game and ask yourself, ''how can I best tell this story through a game?''.

To tell a story I need a conflict, and I need a hierarchy of characters and their motivations, their interactions, and their choices. This is hard, really hard to get right. I''m constantly in awe of those who can do this really well. Now you''re telling a very small minority of competent writers that in a few years you expect them to write great stories where the central element is one or more random players with complete freedom to monkey with their pretty storyline and they must design it to always flow just right. Without strong AI, or a competent Gamemaster, I think this is an impossible task.

So, what do I think will happen? I think automated storytelling will be a total bust in the short term (as in N O F U N), and in its place will arise games moderated by humans. It''s already happening. From there, you will see the great storytelling arise.

quote: Just my thoughts on the matter. And yes, I think the IGDA should offer an award for ''best original storyline'' and ''best character dialogue''.

I disagree on the former, but if they called the latter: "Least Intrusive FMV" I''d be all for it. And perhaps giving out an award for it would encourage better efforts.

Scott

Scott,

Maybe my use of ''author'' in teh above sense is too abstract, or just not the one commonly assumed. Even in the case of a completely linear game, there is some freedom which allows for the creation of a unique player experience. This unique experience is something the player produces through the choices they make in a game, as limited as they might be. In making these choices, they are authoring their own story. So, when we both play Half-Life, we''ve both gone through the same basic series of events in roughly the same order, but I''ve done some things differently and made some unique choices that allow me to have a unique story of my own. We can get together afterwards and talk about how we successfully worked our way through some of the puzzles, or encounters we found particularly enjoyable or maddening, and that becomes our own personal story which we are the authors of within the context of the game.

Scott:"Right now, all an author can do is provide color and backstory."

This is partly true, but the current tools and methodologies of game development don''t particularly lend themselves to the involvement of storytellers. If all you do is ask a writer to come in and fill in the backstory to the game you already developed, then don''t be surprised if that''s all they are able to do. Get someone involved from the beginning and see how much more compelling the experience can be. Also, with the proper tools and resources, I do believe that games can be used to tell stories, and not in a completely linear way (as we would expect from movies or books). The game examples you quote are ones I would categorize under ''not requiring story'', and frankly why would you expect a RTS to tell a story? That''s not what it''s for...it''s about strategy, resource gathering, and combat. In those cases, story is just a veneer to hopefully give the player some impetus.

Scott: "But the problem is that just like the rest of AI in games, we aren''t really doing anything new: we''re just desperately mining the past. "

Who said I was talking about AI? I''m not talking about computer-generated content or human gamemasters in MMORPGs. I''m talking about a whole new methodology when creating a game, one which considers the involvement of a professional storyteller from the get go. Obviously, such system wouldn''t be useful for every game (RTSs for example), but for a first or third-person immersive action adventure (something what Deus Ex tried to be), this could be the first step towards creating truly flexible entertainment.

Scott: "But this, to me, is more world-building than storytelling. World-building is a great idea, and it''s something many SF authors can do far better than they can tell stories, and that makes for a great fit. "

This may be true, but I think you have to expand your understanding of ''storytelling'' a bit. Just because someone isn''t sitting in a comfy chair reading from Aesop''s fables doesn''t mean a story isn''t being told.

Scott: "To tell a story I need a conflict, and I need a hierarchy of characters and their motivations, their interactions, and their choices. This is hard, really hard to get right. I''m constantly in awe of those who can do this really well. Now you''re telling a very small minority of competent writers that in a few years you expect them to write great stories where the central element is one or more random players with complete freedom to monkey with their pretty storyline and they must design it to always flow just right. Without strong AI, or a competent Gamemaster, I think this is an impossible task"

You''re right...all these things are needed. You''re also right that it''s extremely difficult to do it well. You also touch on an important point in your reference to ''pretty storylines''. Writers will have to come to terms with the reality that they are not there to control the story but rather to give the player the tools they need to tell the story themselves, and I think writers will be able to do this. And they''ll probably be more able to relinquish their control than coders have so far been able to admit that the majority of them could not tell a story to save their life, which sometimes seems to be at the root of this whole question. You say games are not about telling pretty stories. I say games are not about developing pretty code.

Scott: "So, what do I think will happen? I think automated storytelling will be a total bust in the short term (as in N O F U N), and in its place will arise games moderated by humans. It''s already happening. From there, you will see the great storytelling arise."

You might be right -- only time will tell. In some certain game types (MMORPGs), having human GMs makes a lot of sense. But not everyone wants to have a multiplayer experience, and so we have to find out ways to make the same kind of story development possible with single-player games. You think AI is part of the answer, and it probably is. But, it''s far from the whole answer. I think auto-generated storylines are a lot of bull, just like I think computer-generated poetry is meaningless. But that''s a whole other issue.

R.

quote: Maybe my use of ''author'' in teh above sense is too abstract, or just not the one commonly assumed. Even in the case of a completely linear game, there is some freedom which allows for the creation of a unique player experience. This unique experience is something the player produces through the choices they make in a game, as limited as they might be.

So let''s cut to the chase. How are you going to affect me emotionally with a video game? Describe an example game and the desired effect. I have yet to see anyone appeal to anything but my sense of fun or my hindbrain.

Chris Crawford, for example, says he can do it with Erasmatron, which uses a facially oriented interface and complex set of internal motivations and negotiations. Having played it, I don''t think he''s succeeded yet IMO, but at least he''s put quite a bit of thought into how to describe a dramatically interesting character.

quote: We can get together afterwards and talk about how we successfully worked our way through some of the puzzles, or encounters we found particularly enjoyable or maddening, and that becomes our own personal story which we are the authors of within the context of the game.

That''s not really a story though, it''s, to borrow a term, a fish tale. Games that lead to great fish tales are great games indeed, but they aren''t stories. They have no emotional impact. They don''t change the way you look at the world. You won''t identify personally with any of the characters. They appeal to our sense of play, but not to our sense of identity.

quote: This is partly true, but the current tools and methodologies of game development don''t particularly lend themselves to the involvement of storytellers. If all you do is ask a writer to come in and fill in the backstory to the game you already developed, then don''t be surprised if that''s all they are able to do. Get someone involved from the beginning and see how much more compelling the experience can be.

Orson Scott Card and Harlan Ellison, two of the best writers alive, have done just that. The results were interesting, but they were still ultimately little more than adventure games with a better thought out backstory IMO.

quote: Also, with the proper tools and resources, I do believe that games can be used to tell stories, and not in a completely linear way (as we would expect from movies or books). The game examples you quote are ones I would categorize under ''not requiring story'', and frankly why would you expect a RTS to tell a story? That''s not what it''s for...it''s about strategy, resource gathering, and combat. In those cases, story is just a veneer to hopefully give the player some impetus.

So let''s think big for a moment. What is this Great American Video Game(tm) that will suck me in. Never mind the state of AI, 3D graphics, or PCs. Think out 5-10 years or so and tell me how you''re going to pull this off. Generalities won''t cut it, I want the beginnings of a specific plan of action. I''ll tell you mine below.

quote: I''m talking about a whole new methodology when creating a game, one which considers the involvement of a professional storyteller from the get go. Obviously, such system wouldn''t be useful for every game (RTSs for example), but for a first or third-person immersive action adventure (something what Deus Ex tried to be), this could be the first step towards creating truly flexible entertainment.

This doesn''t tell me anything. I might as well say that games will be revolutionized when we start using fnurbles and osselpoots because everyone knows that fnurbles and osselpoots make all the difference in the world. HOW will an author add that emotional impact?

quote: This may be true, but I think you have to expand your understanding of ''storytelling'' a bit. Just because someone isn''t sitting in a comfy chair reading from Aesop''s fables doesn''t mean a story isn''t being told.

True enough, everyone''s life is a narrative of some sort, but you''re not going to make Citizen Kane from "I got up, I ate some pop-tarts, and then I went to the potty, the end." For more evidence of just how ghastly this sort of narrative is, check out any journaling site.

quote: You''re right...all these things are needed. You''re also right that it''s extremely difficult to do it well. You also touch on an important point in your reference to ''pretty storylines''. Writers will have to come to terms with the reality that they are not there to control the story but rather to give the player the tools they need to tell the story themselves, and I think writers will be able to do this. And they''ll probably be more able to relinquish their control than coders have so far been able to admit that the majority of them could not tell a story to save their life, which sometimes seems to be at the root of this whole question. You say games are not about telling pretty stories. I say games are not about developing pretty code.

More strawmen. A great game designer or author needs to be technologically savvy lest he say things like "Our game will be better than the competition because it will have a human-like AI", but he need not be a coder, in much the same way that a great screenwriter must understand the process of filmmaking but he need not be a director, an actor, or a musician.

I agree that games are not about developing pretty code. But I think this is more an effect than a cause. First, graphics are a much easier way to differentiate than gameplay because Moore''s Law is on your side while gameplay requires non-linear thinking. And second, Sturgeon''s Law, 90% of everything is crap, has held from day one.

quote: You might be right -- only time will tell. In some certain game types (MMORPGs), having human GMs makes a lot of sense. But not everyone wants to have a multiplayer experience, and so we have to find out ways to make the same kind of story development possible with single-player games. You think AI is part of the answer, and it probably is. But, it''s far from the whole answer. I think auto-generated storylines are a lot of bull, just like I think computer-generated poetry is meaningless. But that''s a whole other issue.

I don''t think current AI is the answer. Though I do believe that there will be advances in describing NPCs by mining past work. What I think is needed is a human-level intellect inside the game itself to provide stories with a soul. Think about it.

And do we really need to restrict this to MMORPGs? Miss Cleo talks one-to-one with her customers, right (cue sarcasm)? Why not simply have the game attach to a central server where humans dispense new plots and twists using some sort of pro-tool? It wouldn''t cost any more than tech support, and I know fanboys that would LEAP at such an opportunity to get paid to do this. I pitched this very idea to MGM Interactive 6 years ago. They said I was out of my mind. They were right, but that''s beside the point.

Scott

Scott, I enjoy this exchange. You''re obviously someone who is passionate about this issue, as I am. You''re also obviously someone who sees the importance of story and how games have failed to exploit the nuances of what it can offer, as I feel I have. I''d love to get into specifics about how such a new system or methodology could be created, and I have a fairly detailed spec, but you''d have to sign an NDA to read it, and I''d have to know you a lot better than I do.

Feel free to email me at r_van_lierop@yahoo.com if you like. I''m not claiming to have all the answers, but I have started down a potentially interesting path. Maybe I''ll be able to convince you that I''m not throwing out strawmen, or living up to Sturgeon''s law.

Oh, and who said anything about a Great *American* Video Game?

R.

quote: Scott, I enjoy this exchange. You''re obviously someone who is passionate about this issue, as I am. You''re also obviously someone who sees the importance of story and how games have failed to exploit the nuances of what it can offer, as I feel I have. I''d love to get into specifics about how such a new system or methodology could be created, and I have a fairly detailed spec, but you''d have to sign an NDA to read it, and I''d have to know you a lot better than I do.

I have been enjoying this exchange as well, but I will state upfront I''m not willing to sign an NDA to discuss concepts. I have my own ideas on how to improve character simulation and storytelling as well, and if I were to sign such a document, and then our concepts crossed paths, I could no longer use my own ideas. And that, bluntly, would suck.

I''m happy to discuss most of what I know openly because the worst case scenario is that some other intelligent soul is already working on something similar, and we might get to talking as a result, and thst''s nothing but cool. Games are 1% inspiration, 99% implementation.

quote: Feel free to email me at r_van_lierop@yahoo.com if you like. I''m not claiming to have all the answers, but I have started down a potentially interesting path. Maybe I''ll be able to convince you that I''m not throwing out strawmen, or living up to Sturgeon''s law.

I''m happy to take this to email, and I really wish you the best of luck with your work if this is the end of the dicussion, though that would be unfortunate.

quote: Oh, and who said anything about a Great *American* Video Game?

Yeah yeah, my bad :-)...

Scott

Scott, I''d be happy to informally discuss concepts through email if you like. My reference to the NDA was in response to your request for a tangible description of the system I''m championing, which I coudl provide in documentation but wouldn''t want do without some kind of protection. You see, I do recognize the fundamental value of ideas and despite the fact that everyone in this forum may probably have something much better or more advanced than what I''m working on, I''d still like to keep a lid on it for now. I hope nobody construes this as an unwillingness to share knowledge. I''ve just invested a significant amount of time in this project and don''t really feel like making it public domain.

R.

"How are you going to affect me emotionally with a video game?"

This reply is not about MMORPGs but single player RPGs

This requires the player to relate to the character he or she is playing. So it''s partly about character creation - allowing a wide variety of traits (not skills or strength / health points) - that make the charcter meaningful to the player. Its really about psycholgical character creation. The player creates a character that has differing emotional responses to events and those responses affect gameplay.

Secondly the character has to be put in a world in which disbelief can be suspended. If you''re playing Tribes then you know its not real. If you''re playing an RPG then the world should be one in which the character can immerse him / her self.

Finally the available events - not necessarily the storyline - should give rise to situations that will affect emotions - danger, relief, fondness for a companion etc...

Not easy and not a full answer I know but these are good starting points IMHO.

PS I''m enjoying this conv. too.

quote: This requires the player to relate to the character he or she is playing. So it's partly about character creation - allowing a wide variety of traits (not skills or strength / health points) - that make the charcter meaningful to the player. Its really about psycholgical character creation. The player creates a character that has differing emotional responses to events and those responses affect gameplay.

Alas, this is a goal without a plan, a destination without a roadmap IMO. I would therefore suggest setting a much more modest goal that isn't so far past the horizon of what we can do. Chris Crawford set for himself just as lofty a plan in life, but he's been attacking it piece by piece with Erasmatron.

So name a game, and tell me how you'd improve its dramatic appeal the tiniest bit. Small steps...

quote: Secondly the character has to be put in a world in which disbelief can be suspended. If you're playing Tribes then you know its not real. If you're playing an RPG then the world should be one in which the character can immerse him / her self.

This is one area where the graphics coders and pretty explosion faction have helped immensely, and give them their due. The difference between 2600 Adventure and Doom 3 is staggering. And it's just going to get better and better, slowly approximating a cheesy version of reality (or unreality if you prefer as I do because there are certain facets of reality we may never get right in VR). In fact, now that it has gotten so good, we're literally arguing over esoterica like texture-filtering methods and anti-aliasing schemes. This is good IMO: it signals that we now have time to worry about the gameplay issues that break immersion.

My observation here is that no matter how good the visual and audio trappings get, we're still going to realize we're dealing with little more than mannequins in games without some amazing paradigm shift.

Second, the overarching goals of games are about as emotionally involving as a porn movie. Even _I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream_, which contained truly complex characters in its back-story, was ultimately just a series of money shots. The characters weren't talking to me. I couldn't make a difference in their lives. All I could do was act out the same scene for them again and again until I tired of it. It was a nice magic trick the first time, but magicians should never repeat their tricks.

quote: Finally the available events - not necessarily the storyline - should give rise to situations that will affect emotions - danger, relief, fondness for a companion etc...

Have you ever cared the least bit for a character in a video game? I've been amazed at how life-like they can appear in recent years (huh huh she kicks high...), but I've never cared what happens to them because they're just a bunch of data, and in fact, nothing IS happening to them. I can play the game to my heart's content and they're always there while I grow older and change.

So tell me how you'd make me care just the tiniest bit about a character in a current game.

Scott


Edited by - varelse on January 25, 2002 5:03:36 PM

Edited by - varelse on January 25, 2002 6:16:22 PM