Jump to content
  • Advertisement
  • Remove ads and support GameDev.net for only $3. Learn more: The New GDNet+: No Ads!

  • 05/09/14 02:50 PM
    Sign in to follow this  

    5 Core Elements of Interactive Storytelling

    Writing for Games

    Over the past few years I have had a growing feeling that videogame storytelling is not what it could be. And the core issue is not in the writing, themes, characters or anything like that; instead, the main problem is with the overall delivery. There is always something that hinders me from truly feeling like I am playing a story. After pondering this on and off for quite some time I have come up with a list of five elements that I think are crucial to get the best kind of interactive narrative. The following is my personal view on the subject, and is much more of a manifesto than an attempt at a rigorous scientific theory. That said, I do not think these are just some flimsy rules or the summary of a niche aesthetic. I truly believe that this is the best foundational framework to progress videogame storytelling and a summary of what most people would like out of an interactive narrative. Also, it's important to note that all of the elements below are needed. Drop one and the narrative experience will suffer. With that out of the way, here goes:

    1) Focus on Storytelling

    This is a really simple point: the game must be, from the ground up, designed to tell a story. It must not be a game about puzzles, stacking gems or shooting moving targets. The game can contain all of these features, but they cannot be the core focus of the experience. The reason for the game to exist must be the wish to immerse the player inside a narrative; no other feature must take precedence over this. The reason for this is pretty self-evident. A game that intends to deliver the best possible storytelling must of course focus on this. Several of the problems outlined below directly stem from this element not being taken seriously enough. A key aspect to this element is that the story must be somewhat tangible. It must contain characters and settings that can be identified with and there must be some sort of drama. The game's narrative cannot be extremely abstract, too simplistic or lack any interesting, story-related, happenings.

    2) Most of the time is spent playing

    Videogames are an interactive medium and therefore the bulk of the experience must involve some form of interaction. The core of the game should not be about reading or watching cutscenes, it should be about playing. This does not mean that there needs to be continual interaction; there is still room for downtime and it might even be crucial to not be playing constantly. The above sounds pretty basic, almost a fundamental part of game design, but it is not that obvious. A common "wisdom" in game design is that choice is king, which Sid Meier's quote "a game is a series of interesting choices" neatly encapsulates. However, I do not think this holds true at all for interactive storytelling. If choices were all that mattered, choose your own adventure books should be the ultimate interaction fiction - they are not. Most celebrated and narrative-focused videogames do not even have any story-related choices at all (The Last of Us is a recent example). Given this, is interaction really that important? It sure is, but not for making choices. My view is that the main point of interaction in storytelling is to create a sense of presence, the feeling of being inside the game's world. In order to achieve this, there needs to be a steady flow of active play. If the player remains inactive for longer periods, they will distance themselves from the experience. This is especially true during sections when players feel they ought to be in control. The game must always strive to maintain and strengthen the experience of "being there".

    3) Interactions must make narrative sense

    In order to claim that the player is immersed in a narrative, their actions must be somehow connected to the important happenings. The gameplay must not be of irrelevant, or even marginal, value to the story. There are two major reasons for this. First, players must feel as though they are an active part of the story and not just an observer. If none of the important story moments include agency from the player, they become passive participants. If the gameplay is all about matching gems then it does not matter if players spend 99% of their time interacting; they are not part of any important happenings and their actions are thus irrelevant. Gameplay must be foundational to the narrative, not just a side activity while waiting for the next cutscene. Second, players must be able to understand their role from their actions. If the player is supposed to be a detective, then this must be evident from the gameplay. A game that requires cutscenes or similar to explain the player's part has failed to tell its story properly.

    4) No repetitive actions

    The core engagement from many games come from mastering a system. The longer time players spend with the game, the better they become at it. In order for this process to work, the player's actions must be repeated over and over. But repetition is not something we want in a well-formed story. Instead, we want activities to only last as long as the pacing requires. The players are not playing to become good at some mechanics, they are playing to be part of an engrossing story. When an activity has played out its role, a game that wants to do proper storytelling must move on. Another problem with repetition is that it breaks down the player's imagination. Other media rely on the audience's mind to fill out the blanks for a lot of the story's occurrences. Movies and novels are vague enough to support these kinds of personal interpretations. But if the same actions are repeated over and over, the room for imagination becomes a lot slimmer. Players lose much of the ability to fill gaps and instead get a mechanical view of the narrative. This does not mean that the core mechanics must constantly change, it just means that there must be variation on how they are used. Both Limbo and Braid are great examples of this. The basic gameplay can be learned in a minute, but the games still provide constant variation throughout the experience.

    5) No major progression blocks

    In order to keep players inside a narrative, their focus must constantly be on the story happenings. This does not rule out challenges, but it needs to be made sure that an obstacle never consumes all focus. It must be remembered that the players are playing in order to experience a story. If they get stuck at some point, focus fades away from the story, and is instead put on simply progressing. In turn, this leads to the unraveling of the game's underlying mechanics and for players to try and optimize systems. Both of these are problems that can seriously degrade the narrative experience. There are three common culprits for this: complex or obscure puzzles, mastery-demanding sections and maze-like environments. All of these are common in games and make it really easy for players to get stuck. Either by not being sure what to do next, or by not having the skills required to continue. Puzzles, mazes and skill-based challenges are not banned, but it is imperative to make sure that they do not hamper the experience. If some section is pulling players away from the story, it needs to go.

    Games that do this

    These five elements all sound pretty obvious. When writing the above I often felt I was pointing out things that were already widespread knowledge. But despite this, very few games incorporate all of the above. This is quite astonishing when you think about it. The elements by themselves are quite common, but the combination of all is incredibly rare. The best case for games of pure storytelling seems to be visual novels. But these all fail at element 2; they simply are not very interactive in nature and the player is mostly just a reader. They often also fail at element 3 as they do not give the player much actions related to the story (most are simply played out in a passive manner). Action games like Last of Us and Bioshock infinite all fail on elements 4 and 5 (repetition and progression blocks). For larger portions of the game they often do not meet the requirements of element 3 (story related actions) either. It is also frequently the case that much of the story content is delivered in long cutscenes, which means that some do not even manage to fulfill element 2 (that most of the game is played). RPGs do not fare much better as they often contain very repetitive elements. They often also have way too much downtime because of lengthy cutscenes and dialogue. Games like Heavy Rain and The Walking Dead come close to feeling like an interactive narrative, but fall flat at element 2. These games are basically just films with interactions slapped on to them. While interaction plays an integral part in the experience it cannot be said to be a driving force. Also, apart from a few instances the gameplay is all about reacting, it does not have have the sort of deliberate planning that other games do. This removes a lot of the engagement that otherwise comes naturally from videogames. So what games do fulfill all of these elements? As the requirements of each element are not super specific, fulfillment depends on how one chooses to evaluate. The one that I find that comes closest is Thirty Flights of Loving, but it is slightly problematic because the narrative is so strange and fragmentary. Still, it is by far the game that comes closest to incorporating all elements. Another close one is To The Moon, but it relies way too much on dialog and cutscenes to meet the requirements. Gone Home is also pretty close to fulfilling the elements. However, your actions have little relevance to the core narrative and much of the game is spent reading rather than playing. Whether one chooses to see these games as fulfilling the requirements or not, I think they show the path forward. If we want to improve interactive storytelling, these are the sort of places to draw inspiration from. Also, I think it is quite telling that all of these games have gotten both critical and (as far as I know) commercial success. There is clearly a demand and appreciation for these sort of experiences.

    Final Thoughts

    It should be obvious, but I might as well say it: these elements say nothing of the quality of a game. One that meets none of the requirements can still be excellent, but it cannot claim to have fully playable, interactive storytelling as its main concern. Likewise, a game that fulfills all can still be crap. These elements just outline the foundation of a certain kind of experience. An experience that I think is almost non-existent in videogames today. I hope that these five simple rules will be helpful for people to evaluate and structure their projects. The sort of videogames that can come out of this thinking is an open question as there is very little done so far. But the games that are close to having all these elements hint at a very wide range of experiences indeed. I have no doubts that this path will be very fruitful to explore.


    • Another important aspects of interaction that I left out is the ability to plan. I mention it a bit when discussing Walking Dead and Heavy Rain, but it is a worth digging into a little bit deeper. What we want from good gameplay interaction is not just that the player presses a lot of buttons. We want these actions to have some meaning for the future state of the game. When making an input players should be simulating in their minds how they see it turning out. Even if it just happens on a very short time span (eg "need to turn now to get a shot at the incoming asteroid") it makes all the difference as now the player has adapted the input in way that never happens in a purely reactionary game.
    • The question of what is deemed repetitive is quite interesting to discuss. For instance, a game like Dear Esther only has the player walking or looking, which does not offer much variety. But since the scenery is constantly changing, few would call the game repetitive. Some games can also offer really complex and varied range of actions, but if the player is tasked to perform these constantly in similar situations, they quickly get repetitive. I think is fair to say that repetition is mostly an asset problem. Making a non-repetitive game using limited asset counts is probably not possible. This also means that a proper storytelling game is bound to be asset heavy.
    • Here are some other games that I feel are close to fulfilling all elements: The Path, Journey, Everyday the Same Dream, Dinner Date, Imortall and Kentucky Route Zero. Whether they succeed or not is a bit up to interpretation, as all are a bit borderline. Still all of these are well worth one's attention. This also concludes the list of all games I can think of that have, or at least are close to having, all five of these elements.


    http://frictionalgames.blogspot.se/2012/08/the-self-presence-and-storytelling.html Here is some more information on how repetition and challenge destroy the imaginative parts of games and make them seem more mechanical. http://blog.ihobo.com/2013/08/the-interactivity-of-non-interactive-media.html This is a nice overview on how many storytelling games give the player no meaningful choices at all. http://frictionalgames.blogspot.se/2013/07/thoughts-on-last-of-us.html The Last of Us is the big storytelling game of 2013. Here is a collection of thoughts on what can be learned from it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_novel Visual Novels are not to be confused with Interactive Fiction, which is another name for text adventure games. Thirty Flights of Loving This game is played from start to finish and has a very interesting usages of scenes and cuts. To The Moon This is basically an rpg but with all of the fighting taken out. It is interesting how much emotion that can be gotten from simple pixel graphics. Gone Home This game is actually a bit similar to To The Moon in that it takes an established genre and cuts away anything not to do with telling a story. A narrative emerge by simply exploring an environment. This article was originally published on the Frictional Games blog and is republished with kind permission from the original author Thomas Grip.

      Report Article
    Sign in to follow this  

    User Feedback

    Dear Esther is almost 'repetitive' in how slow the game goes. It could've used slightly more compacting of the environment to better deliver the story. But Dear Esther is lacking interaction with the story - even though I wasn't watching cutscenes, I still felt like an observer.


    [edit:] Compared to, for example, the original Stanley Parable mod, where I felt like a participant - since the dialog was directed to me and based off of my actions (Portal 2 also did this well).

    Dear Esther only just played unrelated dialog based on what area I entered, and was talking more about the area than about me, and definitely wasn't talking to me. It wasn't triggered in response to an in-game action I took. It felt like those pre-recorded voice-description boxes some zoos have, where you click the button and it talks about the animals in the cage. Dear Esther dialog was area-related but not action-related. It had little or nothing to do with my actions, so I was not a participant.


    Thirty Flights did well with interaction forwarding (and communicating) the story but, as you mentioned, because of its jumpy nature cutting between different (interactive) scenes, it felt disjointed and disconnected. It's kinda like a director making a movie like Memento and telling the story backwards, before mastering telling the story forward. It's definitely a step forward in story interaction though!

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Really inspiring article Thomas. I specifically have encountered exceedingly few games where I felt that the game itself was designed towards the development of an interactive story as opposed to gameplay. Like you said, Journey comes to mind (the only one I'm really familiar with out of those you mentioned).


    However, I'd like to ask for some kind of concrete examples you can think of (even if only hypothetical) in which a game could go without some gameplay elements and still be a spectacular interactive story. If we are to make a game that focuses on storyline, how should it be differentiated from a gameplay oriented video game? It has to have gameplay elements of some sort to be interactive, so how best to integrate these? I see you've mentioned The Last of Us which I think did this at times (notes, in-game dialogue, etc.), but how would you extrapolate a set of guidelines for effective gameplay techniques that accomplish the goals you are searching for? This will help to focus our attention on the key things we want, both conceptually and in design mechanics.

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I seem to disagree a lot with this article, it's not as easy as you say to solve this problem of delivering narrative in games as you say. I'm not even sure if there's a solution to it, games in fact may just not be a good storytelling medium. Gameplay mechanics are indeed good at helping portray a certain experience (i.e. being a cop), however, they do NOT aid in portraying a STORY.


    Think of games versus movies as 'doing' versus 'observing,' a story is just generally better conveyed when a person is observing the happening rather than actually doing it. If you were one of the characters in the movie, the experience would be completely different: it's impossible to create the type of suspense where the audience knows more than the characters, or it's impossible to create a scenario where the characters know more than the audience. In addition, being in the actual film means you'll react in completely differently to observers so that's just another factor to consider to make things even more complicated than they already are.  


    This is why most games serve as 'simulations' rather than a medium to portray narrative.

    It almost feels like that in order to portray a proper narrative in games, they need to be less like a game and more like a movie. I guess with the right amount of 'observing' vs. 'doing' then a proper narrative can be conveyed where the gameplay aids the experience of being in the role of the main character/s whilst the story unfolds through observation. And this doesn't mean cut scenes, because story can unfold during gameplay as well (but it must be through observation). Overall my point is that observation is necessary for a story to unfold and that gameplay only serves to aid in portraying a certain experience.

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think Bastion really embodies most of this, you are almost always playing, that playing never get's repetitive (you may have an optimal loadout but upgrades and new enemies always keep it fresh), and you are very core to the plot of the game. That's definitely one of my top 5 games.

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thanks for linking the 4-Layer Narrative Design article Carsten (and thank you Thomas for writing it). That was more what I was looking for in terms of "examples". It really helped make the concept more clear.

    @ Gaming Point: if you read Thomas' document TheSelfPresenceStorytelling,pdf, he specifically talks about how his goal is to get people "playing" a story rather than just "observing" it. Having players interact with the setting, characters, etc. to bring them into the fiction of the world in a more immersive manner. There would of course be an "observing" sense to any instance of watching other characters have dialogue or having cutscenes explicitly, but it's engaging the player's thought process about what is going on in the game world and letting them decipher how it is they intend to progress that adds to their involvement in the existing story.

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm not sure what to think of this article. I agree with some parts, but  disagree with the overall idea.


    My main problem with it is: 

    It must be remembered that the players are playing in order to experience a story


    The article revolves around that opinion made fact. Of course, I know you mention that it's a personal view, and I get that. I just have to say that I can't agree with that sentiment. Plenty of games focus so much on narrative that they end up hurting themselves. Bioshock Infinite is, in my opinion, a terrible game precisely because the developers were obsessed with making the player care about the story and characters, resulting in mediocre gameplay. There are exceptions, I guess, but the only one I can think of is Planescape: Torment.


    Why would I play a game for a story, when most are just terrible? I find that a good story is just icing on the cake. If the game has superb gameplay, I'll love it. If it also has a good story and characters, that just makes it even more fantastic. But a game with a good story and horrible gameplay? To begin with, most games that try to focus on a story seem to be really, really bad in that aspect. A game with extremely good gameplay will have me coming back to it, one with a decent story and no gameplay will be played through once (if at all) and forever forgotten.


    I do agree with some parts, curiously enough. Mainly:

    2) Most of the time is spent playing

    Videogames are an interactive medium and therefore the bulk of the experience must involve some form of interaction. The core of the game should not be about reading or watching cutscenes, it should be about playing.



    I'm cool with stories in games, I like them when they are done decently enough. But to obsess over it is just wrong to me. Videogames are not books, they are not movies. They should be treated as such, use their strengths to convey something, instead of shoehorning a narrative into it and ruin a potentially good game.


    There should obviously be more examples, but a point in case I think, is Demon's/Dark Souls. What do you think about them? The developers themselves said that they did gameplay first, and then added a story. They focused on making a fun game, a rewarding game, something to enjoy and play through again and again. And only then did they add a story. And surprisingly enough, it worked wonders. The player played through it, and IF he cared about the story, he could look for it. Dig it up and build it, resulting in an incredibly rich lore and story that is still discussed amongst fans. They love it. Both the lore and the story that actually makes sense with the player's actions. The way that a player goes through the game is directly connected to the story. The way you level up, the hunger for souls, the way some enemies behave, their locations, the ending of the game, everything makes sense. Even if the player gives up and drops the game makes sense within the context of the story.


    I'll stop there as it's just an example, but you get my point. Those games wanted to be a game first, a story second, and it really worked out for the best. I think that more developers should learn from that, and be subtle, be smart, and convey what you want in a non intrusive way, meant for those that actually care about what you want to say or the feeling you want to express. Understand the strengths of your medium and understand that it's simply not the same as a book, a visual novel, or a movie.

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @ArsDiaboli && @GamingPoint:

    I have a feeling that we're mixing different kinds of games here. I personally agree that gameplay has to come first and foremost, as that is what makes games "fun" for me.

    Then again, as a Designer and I really appreciate any input on the topic from designers who are emphasizing conveying a story. I find there's much to learn for the process that ArsDiaboli describes. Tricks of the trade, so to speak.


    Yes, with interactive games we have to work on telling a story with many more channels then Films, Audio or Books. Think about the differences in storytelling between Books and Film. And the many different kinds of games that can be made.

    I find it a quantum leap and the more techniques we're exploring as a community, the more tested and discussed methods one can choose from when designing a specific kind of game.


    Cheers /Carsten

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @Carsten Germer


    There is no rule that states that gameplay must come first. For some reason people keep bringing that up and I understand why - games have this interactivity element which other mediums don't have so game designers want to emphasize it. However, gameplay tends to do more harm to the story than good, for many reasons. One example I can think of the top of my head is that gameplay serves as 'filler' material which causes the audience to lose attention or focus. Everything you see in a movie is done so the audience's attention is drawn in, for example, if a character is to walk from school to a train station with very little else happening, a movie won't show that scene. It will cut straight to the character being at the train station. Most games tend to make the player walk to the train station, and this is the kind of interactivity that ruins storytelling.


    There is NOTHING wrong with minimal gameplay. Walking Dead is a good example where we are drawn into the game with no gameplay except for a few dialogue choices here and there. Yes, they have some point and click adventure style gameplay, but for the most part they do it correctly - in scenes where they want the player to feel the mood of being in the character's shoes. For example: clementine sneaking through the house at night.


    This is not to say that gameplay is bad. There's nothing wrong with gameplay, but if it doesn't add to the story, then omit it or find a better way. The key is to use all the elements at your disposal and to use gameplay correctly to tell a story. If a certain experience is better conveyed through cutscenes, then go ahead and use cutscenes. The only problem with cutscenes is that transitioning from gameplay to observing might cause disruptions to the story, but I won't discuss that here because it will take many pages.

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    A good read. I wonder what he (and others) would think of a point-and-click RPG like Syberia?


    Definitely gated, but the story and character development is everything. Without the 'gates' you would just be reading an interactive novel (with not much in the interactive department...).


    Still IMO a great game, though.


    My own project, which I consider very "story-driven" uses 'gates' of various kinds at times, but they're meant to be a bit frustrating: You're trying to find somebody to save the world and everyone wants you to jump through these damn hoops. Doesn't anybody care?  I'm finding it a tough balancing act with character frustration vs. player frustration.

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Latest Featured Articles

  • Featured Blogs

  • Popular Now

  • Similar Content

    • By OConquestGame
      Hello there!
      I’m the creator and producer of an upcoming visual novel / video game. 
      My team and I are looking for artists (character and background), writers (experienced in writing relatable characters and witty dialogue), and programmers (familiar with unity and creating mini games). 
      Our team is a group of close friends looking to break the mold of the traditional visual novel and create something new and positive. This game will be highly promoted and be a great portfolio piece. Rates are negotiable!
      If you are interested please contact/message us today! OConQuestGame@gmail.com
    • By Gas Lantern Games

      I have spent the last year and a half developing a game in my spare time in Unity! I am releasing it soon on Steam. Ant Empire is a strategic remake of some older games. It is influenced by games such as Ant Empire and Civilization.

      I am currently doing a kickstarter to help fund an AI before launch.

      I have attached some images (tried some gifs but they were too large) to show the current stage of Ant Empire, which is nearly completed.

    • By MarkNefedov
      So, initially I was planning to create a base class, and some inherited classes like weapon/armour/etc, and each class will have an enum that specifies its type, and everything was going ok until I hit "usable items".
      I ended up with creating UsableItem class, and tons of inherited classes, like Drink/Apple/SuperApple/MagickPotato/Potion/Landmine/(whatever that player can use) each with unique behaviour. I planned to store items in the SQLite database, but I discovered that there are not many ways of creating variables(pointers) with type determined at runtime (that preferably get their stats/model/icon/etc from DB). So, I think that I need to use some variation of the Factory pattern, but I have no idea how I should implement it for this particular case (giant switch/case 😂 ).
      It would be really nice if you guys can give me some advice on how I should manage this kind of problem or maybe how I should redesign the inventory.
      Inventory storage is an array of pointers. I'm working with CryEngine V, so RTTI can't be used.
      Example code:
      namespace Inventory { enum ItemType { Static, Building, Usable, Weapon, Armour }; class InventoryItem { public: virtual ~InventoryItem() = default; virtual ItemType GetType() = 0; virtual string GetName() = 0; virtual string GetIcon() = 0; virtual void Destroy() { //TODO: Notify inventory storage delete this; } }; class UsableItem : public InventoryItem { public: struct Usage { int Index; string Use_Name; }; virtual CryMT::vector<Usage> GetUsages() = 0; virtual void UseItem(int usage) = 0; }; class TestItem : public UsableItem { int Counter =0; ItemType GetType() override { return ItemType::Usable; } string GetName() override { return "TestItem"; } string GetIcon() override { return "NULL"; } CryMT::vector<Usage> GetUsages() override { CryMT::vector<Usage> Usages; Usages.push_back(Usage{1, "Dec"}); Usages.push_back(Usage{2,"Inc"}); Usages.push_back(Usage{3,"Show"}); return Usages; } void UseItem(int usage) override { CryMT::vector<Usage> uses = GetUsages(); switch (usage) { case 0: for (int i =0; i<uses.size(); i++) { CryLog(uses[i].Use_Name); } break; case 1: Counter--; CryLog("Dec"); CryLog("%d", Counter); break; case 2: Counter++; CryLog("Inc"); CryLog("%d", Counter); break; case 3: CryLog("%d", Counter); break; default: CryLog("WRONG INDEX"); break; } } }; }  
    • By gdarchive
      Due to my belief in learning through self-discovery and my ongoing creative evolution, I've long put off doing any tutorials. However, after making pixel art for over 3 years I've established many solid techniques worth laying out in a concrete fashion. While I'm excited by the prospect of helping others with my experience, I still urge artists to explore things their own way. The wonderful thing about art is the unlimited number of solutions to a problem. I offer you solutions that have worked for me and I hope they work for you, but I will be even more thrilled if you discover a better solution along the way.

      When it comes to pixel art, it all starts with a good color palette. Creating a custom color palette can be a very satisfying and powerful way to establish your own unique look. I'll guide you through my method as I create a new palette. But first, let's go over some basic principals.
      It's all about HSB
      I find it easiest to understand and control color through HSB.
      Hue - The actual color (0 - 360º)
      Saturation - The intensity or purity of a color (0 - 100%)
      Brightness - The amount of black or white mixed with a color (0 - 100%)
      By understanding and adjusting these 3 fundamental properties you can create custom colors with precise control. I recommend this article by Steven Bradley for more detailed definitions of HSB.
      Color Ramps
      A color ramp is a specific range of colors that work well together, arranged according to brightness. Here is an example of what I consider a good color ramp. 

      Brightness steadily increases from left to right in this example. As the colors reach high brightness levels it's important to decrease saturation, or you'll end up with intense eye burning colors. Also, colors with very low brightness can become overly rich and weighty with high saturation. Saturation peaks in the middle swatch in this example.  
      A good color ramp should also apply hue-shifting, which is a transition in hue across the color ramp. In the previous example the hue is shifting by positive degrees as the brightness increases. 
      Many beginners overlook hue-shifting and end up with 'straight ramps' that only transition brightness and saturation. There is no law that says you can't do this but the resulting colors will lack interest and be difficult to harmonize with ramps of a different hue. This only makes sense to me if you want a monochromatic look and stick to one straight ramp.
      The Palette
      A color ramp is essentially a palette, but most palettes contain multiple ramps. I like to create large palettes with lots of ramps, which I can then pull smaller palettes from per assignment. 
      Mondo  - 128 colors

      Become a Pixel Insider member and download Mondo
      I took the opportunity to make a brand new palette for this tutorial. My intention was to create a general purpose palette that strikes a balance between vibrant colors and desaturated natural colors. So, how to make such a large palette?
      First I decide how many swatches I want per ramp and how many degrees of hue shift. For this palette I want 9 swatches per ramp with 20 degrees of positive hue shift between each swatch. I like a lot of hue shift because it creates harmony between ramps and just looks neat, but 20 is about as high as I go.

      The color picker panel in Photoshop. We only need to be concerned with adjusting HSB.
      I use Photoshop, but a similar color picker panel should be accessible in just about any graphics software. To start I pick a color that will fit right in the the middle of a ramp. The hue is somewhat arbitrary, but the saturation and brightness is critical. I want the middle color to be be the most vibrant so I set the saturation and hue to the max combined number I'm willing to go.

      After I've chosen my first color I can set the hue for the remaining swatches based on the positive 20 degree shift I wanted. I could reverse the direction of hue shift if I want but positive hue shift usually results in more natural colors, warming as they become brighter. 
      I still need to sort out the increments for S&B. Unlike hue, shifting the S&B in uniform increments doesn't necessarily produce satisfactory results. However, there are a few tendencies I follow. Brightness consistently increases from left to right and usually never starts at 0, unless I want black. Saturation peaks around the middle and never fully goes to 100, or 0. The goal in mind is to create even contrast between each color.

      After some tuning and eyeballing these are my final values and resulting color ramp. The hue shift looks pretty strong but it will make sense when I add more ramps.

      This version shows the difference in the increments. Pay attention to what the S&B are doing. You can see there is some consistency in the pattern. The saturation takes larger steps on the ends and smaller steps in the middle where it's the highest percentage. The brightness takes smaller steps as it gets closer to the end at full 100%.

      Here's another visualization that clearly shows the flow of S&B as line graphs. You don't have to follow this general flow of S&B. It just depends what look you're going for. I've made ramps where the saturation continues to climb as the brightness decreases, creating an X pattern. This results in vivid dark colors. The biggest mistake is combining high saturation and brightness, unless you want to burn some eyeballs. I recommend a lot of experimentation with the HSB values of your ramp. I've tried to come up with mathematically precise formulas but it always seems to come down to trusting the eyeballs to some extent.  
      Now let's finish the palette.

      Up to this point all I have been doing is picking colors and drawing them as single pixel dots on a tiny canvas. I haven't actually added any swatches into the swatch panel. With the first ramp established all I have to do to create more ramps for my palette is shift the entire set of hues.

      I want 8 ramps total so I will shift the hues of each ramp by 45 degrees to complete the 360 degree cycle around the color wheel. I could do this in the color picker by adjusting the H value one color at a time, but In Photoshop I can save a lot of time by duplicating the ramp and changing the hue of the entire selection (Image-Adjustments-hue/saturation, or ⌘+U).

      After adjusting the hue of all my color ramps my palette appears like this. It looks pretty nice but It's lacking more neutral desaturated colors.

      To add desaturated colors I duplicate the whole middle section of the palette, omitting only the darkest and lightest colors on the ends, flip it over and desaturate them with the Hue/Saturation panel. I omit the light and dark columns because they appear nearly the same as the originals. I flip the colors because it makes for easy navigation, and it looks cool. The desaturated colors can provide a more natural look, and work well as grays in combination with the vibrant colors.

      The final task is actually adding the colors into the swatch panel. With the color picker panel open I sample each color with the eyedropper and click the 'Add to Swatches' button. I add them from left to right, top to bottom so they will appear in the swatch panel in the correct order. This is quite tedious but the only way I know of to add the colors in the particular order I want. 

      Once I've added all the colors into the swatch panel I click on the panel options and make sure to save my palette. I can then easily load the palette as a .aco file into the swatch panel anytime. Also, by selecting 'Save Swatches for Exchange' you can create a .ase file, which can be loaded into several other Adobe programs. Save the image of your palette as a .png file and you can load it into Aseprite.   
      Well, that completes my 128 color palette - Mondo. Now let's look at how I use the palette with some examples. 
      Picking Colors

      This example keeps it pretty simple, mostly relying on horizontal ramps of adjacent colors. You can also see how the warm desaturated colors work nicely with the vivid hues. I've added white into palette for extra contrast. 

      This example shows how ramps can move horizontally and diagonally. Because of the hue shift every color is surrounded by colors that can work together.

      Harmony is everywhere, just pick and play!

      This example uses complimentary color in combination with neutrals. The result captures an ominous yet hopeful feeling that perfectly fits the mood I wanted. 
      Picking colors for your art always requires some good sense, but a versatile palette with criss-crossing ramps like this makes it much easier. A little color goes a long way with pixel art, as you can see I never use a lot of colors for any one image.
      Creating a palette with this method also works great for game art, and will ensure everything in your game has consistent colors. I used this method to create a 160 color palette for Thyrian Defenders. We've been able to depict an incredible range of environments and characters while maintaining a consistent look overall. Other aesthetic choices come into play, but color is the fundamental ingredient that ties everything together.  
      Final Word
      Overall I'm quite happy with how this palette turned out. I think you'll be seeing more of my work in the Mondo palette from now on!
      I hope this helps you come up with some palettes of your own. I know It can take a bit of time to get a feel for HSB, but even if you're a beginner I think making palettes like this is a great way to understand color. Go crazy with HSB and don't be afraid to experiment with formulas that look different than my example. Also, you don't have to make such a large palette. Start with trying to make a small ramp.
      About The Author
      Raymond Schlitter (Slynyrd) is a former graphic designer who turned his creative passion to pixel art and game design in early 2015. Now he shares his knowledge with tutorials while he continues to make fantastic art and work on games. Support him on Patreon and get the inside scoop on his latest work.
      Note: This post was originally published on Raymond's blog, and is reproduced here with kind permission from the author.  If you enjoyed this article please consider supporting Raymond on Patreon, where he provides backers with exclusive downloads such the Mondo palette as .aco, .ase, and .png files. Get Mondo!  You can also make a one time donation to the author if you prefer not to subscribe on Patreon.
      [Wayback Machine Archive]
    • By Effekseer
      Effekseer Project develops "Effekseer," which is visual software for creating open source games; on September 13,
      I released "Effekseer 1.4," which is the latest major version release. 
      Effekseer is a tool to create various visual effects used in games and others.
      With Effekseer, you can easily create various visual effects such as explosion, light emission, and particle simply by specifying different parameters.
      Effekseer's effect creation tool works on Windows and macOS.
      The created visual effects can be viewed on Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS, Android and other environments with DirectX, OpenGL and so on.
      In addition, there are plugins / libraries for game engines such as Unity and UnrealEngine4 to view visual effects.
      Effekseer 1.4 is an updated version of Effekseer 1.3 released in November 2017.
      This update contains the following changes:
      The renewal of UI. Support the tool for macOS. Addition of a function to read FBX with animation. Addition of parameters to protect collied effects and objects. Addition of parameters for easier control of the effects. In addtion I improve plugins/libraries for Unity, UnrealEngine4 and Cocos2d-x.
      Besides that, more than 40 new sample effects have been added and many bugs have been fixed.
      Effekseer 1.4 is available on the project website.
      The license for the software is the MIT license.

      Sample Effects.
      Tool Demo

      View full story
  • Advertisement

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!