TechnoGoth:
Follow through on your example of a character afraid of heights. The character is confronted by a high bridge that he wants to cross. The character will either conquer his fears and cross, succumb to his fears and fall, or yield to his fears and go the long way around, missing what''s on the other side. Can you give this choice to the player? I think that players are choose to win by meeting objectives (cross the bridge to get the prize) and they would never choose to fail at a task in order to make a better story. Thus the protagonist remains flawless.
You could use some sort of physical test of the player''s coordination, having him carefully drive the character across or not. but hten the player will make the choice based on his physical abiltites, not based on the quality of the story that''s generated. The story bits are just a thin veneer over the gameplay. The game could achieve the same results with a more mundane explanation (like high winds). The drama doesn''t drive the game.
Or maybe I''m just not good enough at writing to see it. But I don''t think that approach works.
AdventureDesign:
That''s an interesting approach. Follow through on your doubt example. The hero suffers from self-doubt. How does this change his behavior? How does this change the behavior of the player who controls the hero?
Rayno:
You may have something there. I don''t think we can convince the player to make sub-optimal choices for the sake of drama (ie redefine winning to mean a good story instead of success at a task). But if we give the player two dramatic choices and allow him to choose between them, where he gains something and loses something else for each choice, it might work. You could even then retroactively assign dramatic meaning to the player choices (maybe).
Would it encourage players if the game created a written story or journal of the player''s choices in an external file which could be shared with others?
This reminds me a bit of the Princess Maker games.
CGP, gamegod:
You spot the problem right away. We could impose a story or flaws on a character, but that''s not the best way to do things. We can also write the story outside of the gameplay, but then this doesn''t involve the player. How do we get the player to actively participate in the drama? Or do we just write off a section of stories because they don''t work in an interactive medium?
JSwing
Perfect Protagonists?
The thing about a game story is that not all players are interested in it. They play the game for the other aspects and could care less about the story. Thats why you have to remove the choice from the player for the sake of drama. There have to be instenance when they player/character wants to do something but they are unable because the characters flaws prevent them from doing so.
Back to my example of the bride of the chasm, The player wants to cross the bridge but when he tries. The character is overcome with vertgo and falls to their knees panting at the base of the bridge. All the while the the rapid dogs are getting closer and the player if running out of time to act. The player could attempt to cross the bridge again or instead flee in a diffrent direction hoping that another option will present itself. If the player keeps attempting to cross the bridge he might contiune to stand in fear at the threshold, or fall to their death, or there could a small chance that the character overcomes their fear and is able to cross the bridge. elimanating that flaw that has been holding the charater back.
The drama comes from the characters personal conflict, sure you could have a little message that says high winds prevent you from crossing the bride, but then where is the drama?
Another example could be that early on in the game the player encounters an evil queen plotting the downfall of civilization, having destroyed her current scheme and defeated her guards the player now finds themselves standing before the helpless woman, knowing that they could kill her now and end any further harm she might cause. However they can''t because their character is hero and can''t bring themselves to kill an unarmed woman in cold blood. So they walk away and hope for the best. Of course as the game progresses and the queens rebuilt armies have killed layed waste everyone the character knew and loved. The pain of that loss and their self loathing removes any lingering heroic ideals allowing the player to finally put an end to it all.
I think part of the way to tie gameplay into story is with choices or lack their of. If the player has infinite options the story becomes a side note in the background. Its important the story be built around the player as they are playing the game. Some time this means removing th choice from the player to show that the character is the sum of the players actions. For instance of the player is playing as cold blood thirsty killer then thats how the character should act even if that means doing something the player may regret.
For instance There could be young woman childhood friend of the character who conspired with the forces of evil not to harm the character but because they need to protect someone they loved and ignorance to the full scope of what she was doing. When the character confronts her and hears her tragic tale and attempts at forgiveness. The player will be so touched that they will want to let her go. However thats not the character they''ve been playing that character is cold, ruthless killer and so he turn to his friend. Looks her in the eyes and then fires, leaving her cold dead body on the floor as he walk away.
-----------------------------------------------------
Writer, Programer, Cook, I''m a Jack of all Trades
Current Design project
Chaos Factor Design Document
Back to my example of the bride of the chasm, The player wants to cross the bridge but when he tries. The character is overcome with vertgo and falls to their knees panting at the base of the bridge. All the while the the rapid dogs are getting closer and the player if running out of time to act. The player could attempt to cross the bridge again or instead flee in a diffrent direction hoping that another option will present itself. If the player keeps attempting to cross the bridge he might contiune to stand in fear at the threshold, or fall to their death, or there could a small chance that the character overcomes their fear and is able to cross the bridge. elimanating that flaw that has been holding the charater back.
The drama comes from the characters personal conflict, sure you could have a little message that says high winds prevent you from crossing the bride, but then where is the drama?
Another example could be that early on in the game the player encounters an evil queen plotting the downfall of civilization, having destroyed her current scheme and defeated her guards the player now finds themselves standing before the helpless woman, knowing that they could kill her now and end any further harm she might cause. However they can''t because their character is hero and can''t bring themselves to kill an unarmed woman in cold blood. So they walk away and hope for the best. Of course as the game progresses and the queens rebuilt armies have killed layed waste everyone the character knew and loved. The pain of that loss and their self loathing removes any lingering heroic ideals allowing the player to finally put an end to it all.
I think part of the way to tie gameplay into story is with choices or lack their of. If the player has infinite options the story becomes a side note in the background. Its important the story be built around the player as they are playing the game. Some time this means removing th choice from the player to show that the character is the sum of the players actions. For instance of the player is playing as cold blood thirsty killer then thats how the character should act even if that means doing something the player may regret.
For instance There could be young woman childhood friend of the character who conspired with the forces of evil not to harm the character but because they need to protect someone they loved and ignorance to the full scope of what she was doing. When the character confronts her and hears her tragic tale and attempts at forgiveness. The player will be so touched that they will want to let her go. However thats not the character they''ve been playing that character is cold, ruthless killer and so he turn to his friend. Looks her in the eyes and then fires, leaving her cold dead body on the floor as he walk away.
-----------------------------------------------------
Writer, Programer, Cook, I''m a Jack of all Trades
Current Design project
Chaos Factor Design Document
Anachronox is a good example of balancing character flaws with gameplay flexibility and fun. The main character ("Boots") starts the story as a broke, down-on-his-luck, alcoholic (well.... Disney-style alcoholic) detective. By using the storyline to start the character in a penniless state, the game shows us Boots'' frailty and punishes him for it, without punishing the player in turn.
Rather than dropping the character flaws after the beginning of gameplay, however, the storyline explicates and deepens them. Boots, as it turns out, is depressed and washed-up primarily because he has, effectively, sold his soul to the Anachronox crime lord. His fear of confrontation is played out through cutscenes and through plot, but never leaves the player at an apparent locked door. This serves several purposes:
* Adds depth to the protagonist by revealing character flaws
* Builds up the antagonist into an almost mythical figure; this is one of the few times I''ve actually really felt a protagonist''s fear of his enemy
* Avoids the hackneyed small-boss-medium-boss-big-boss progression so common to these games; the crime lord is "special".
Addy''s contention that "character flaws" are a subset of a more general "character frailty" is, IMHO, spot-on. And so many games have that frailty--after all, few games out there have you start out as a character who could beat the final boss hands-down. But they don''t allow the character to fully react to that frailty, which is crucial for full impact.
How appropriate. You fight like a cow.
Rather than dropping the character flaws after the beginning of gameplay, however, the storyline explicates and deepens them. Boots, as it turns out, is depressed and washed-up primarily because he has, effectively, sold his soul to the Anachronox crime lord. His fear of confrontation is played out through cutscenes and through plot, but never leaves the player at an apparent locked door. This serves several purposes:
* Adds depth to the protagonist by revealing character flaws
* Builds up the antagonist into an almost mythical figure; this is one of the few times I''ve actually really felt a protagonist''s fear of his enemy
* Avoids the hackneyed small-boss-medium-boss-big-boss progression so common to these games; the crime lord is "special".
Addy''s contention that "character flaws" are a subset of a more general "character frailty" is, IMHO, spot-on. And so many games have that frailty--after all, few games out there have you start out as a character who could beat the final boss hands-down. But they don''t allow the character to fully react to that frailty, which is crucial for full impact.
How appropriate. You fight like a cow.
quote:Original post by JSwing
AdventureDesign:
That''s an interesting approach. Follow through on your doubt example. The hero suffers from self-doubt. How does this change his behavior? How does this change the behavior of the player who controls the hero?
JSwing
Doubt is the moment of pause you give the character and player by creating the antagonist''s omnipotence representation. It''s it''s own effect, and serves precisely that purpose, nothing more unless you want it to, such as making the rest of the hunting party worried because el hondo is.
The hero doesn''t suffer from self doubt, that if too far an extreme or plausible reaction from the protagonist, if the doubt were so large, it would be a flaw bordering on an antihero, which is a different relationship in terms of audience investment in a lead character. In one case, they like him, in another, they find him intrigueing. This Judge Dredd vs. Willy Lohman.
A confident protagonist would reasonably show only doubt, leading to a character emotional completion (in other words, you wouldn''t leave them wallowing in doubt, either they have to do something about it or not; either way you choose, you are creating action and character growth/change regardless of choice, and the player or audience will go along due to the investment thay have in both empathy and suspension of disbelief) action/reaction: he''s doubtful, so he''s rethinking about going after the protagonist now, later or ever (though dramaturgy says it must come anyway), he''s rethinking how he''s going to take him down, though he never really had deep doubt that he would not be able to bring him down. These subtleties are the playgroung of the violon of player emotions, or audience emotions that we compose and play upon.
If it were I, I''d write all the ways the scene or level could go, and put them up on the wall and test them for fun, engagement, challenge overcome values, the things I am testing for when designing for gameplay balance. A cruder example would be a puzzle level after a gunwar level after a sultry siren NPC scambabe level. See what I mean now?
The way this changes the way the player plays the hero, or invests in the hero psychologically, I think that would be two different kinds of ramifications I''d test for in design and gameplay testing. I didn''t particularly like the character max payne, but I liked some of the play features, so that kept me interested, and I hated the antagonistic forces reason for being, drugs, and I thought a couple of levels were world class and the comic panel interstitials as transition devices were novel, but I played the game through and only once.
This area is real subjective, and I always go back to initially designing the game and characters that I would want to play, then testing the design towards the market demand I am either seeking to discover the existance of or know exists already because of some aspect of another titles proven performence either financially or critically.
HTH,
Addy
JSwing:
An external journal would be interesting. Playing through the game would be like generating a short story, or novel.
My current interest is in designing game that really isn''t what one would define as a game. I''m more interested in creating a dramatic experience for the sake of being a dramatic experience. I mean without powerups or monsters. Just throwing a player into a incredible situation and setting, and souround him with interesting characters, and let him find his way out. So this is where I am coming from with this.
An external journal would be interesting. Playing through the game would be like generating a short story, or novel.
My current interest is in designing game that really isn''t what one would define as a game. I''m more interested in creating a dramatic experience for the sake of being a dramatic experience. I mean without powerups or monsters. Just throwing a player into a incredible situation and setting, and souround him with interesting characters, and let him find his way out. So this is where I am coming from with this.
Author
AdventureDesign:
So you''re using doubt for characterization, but not as a serious character flaw. The way you might give them a personality quirk, to endear the chracter to the player (reader). I agree this means we don''t need to give the character flaws to get player symapthy.
But we''ve still got a perfect protagonist, what is used in most games today. Can we instead make a game starring the player as Willy Lohman?
The two-fold question is:
Do video games, as a medium, require a perfect protagonist? So far everything says yes. Rayno''s suggestion is the closest so far to a maybe not, but even that seems to be a limited subset.
If we have to have a protagonist that is perfect, does that rule out a whole chunk of stories that we can use to make games? This appears to be true. Character-driven stories in a static medium (books, film), require internal conflict. I''m pretty sure this would be the same for video games, though Rayno''s suggestion might be a work-around.
Rayno:
I have been thinking recently along similar lines. But I''m not sure whether I''d prefer to create the drama through Simulation or Game Mechanics. The tricky thing for me has been figuring out what the important bits are (what to simulate, or how to create the mechanics). But that''s another discussion.
The journal idea would only work if the game had a random generation to it, so that different people have truly different experiences.
Some related topics/source that I have been looking at are on a site for indie (paper) rpgs called The Forge. Ron Edwards has clumsy writing, but he''s got some good ideas at the core. Nice site to browse.
JSwing
So you''re using doubt for characterization, but not as a serious character flaw. The way you might give them a personality quirk, to endear the chracter to the player (reader). I agree this means we don''t need to give the character flaws to get player symapthy.
But we''ve still got a perfect protagonist, what is used in most games today. Can we instead make a game starring the player as Willy Lohman?
The two-fold question is:
Do video games, as a medium, require a perfect protagonist? So far everything says yes. Rayno''s suggestion is the closest so far to a maybe not, but even that seems to be a limited subset.
If we have to have a protagonist that is perfect, does that rule out a whole chunk of stories that we can use to make games? This appears to be true. Character-driven stories in a static medium (books, film), require internal conflict. I''m pretty sure this would be the same for video games, though Rayno''s suggestion might be a work-around.
Rayno:
I have been thinking recently along similar lines. But I''m not sure whether I''d prefer to create the drama through Simulation or Game Mechanics. The tricky thing for me has been figuring out what the important bits are (what to simulate, or how to create the mechanics). But that''s another discussion.
The journal idea would only work if the game had a random generation to it, so that different people have truly different experiences.
Some related topics/source that I have been looking at are on a site for indie (paper) rpgs called The Forge. Ron Edwards has clumsy writing, but he''s got some good ideas at the core. Nice site to browse.
JSwing
quote:Original post by JSwing
AdventureDesign:
So you''re using doubt for characterization, but not as a serious character flaw.
Is the difference so distinct, or do you require it? Self doubt *is* a flaw, but a subtle one, not like a physical drawback. But flaws don''t have to be representated in industrial strength quantities or quality to impress or move or get an audience to feel, unless your target audience is the construction site cleaner''s union.
Granted sometimes subtlety escapes viewers and players, but that''s no reason to forsake educating the player with a new perception by creating it for them entertainingly. Often, they are delighted, other times, it makes them think about what they just saw or did. Sometimes, if you did a really good job and got lucky, they grow.
In either case, the product and the designer and the player wins, though the player may not see it that way, the testers, critics and money people may, and that''s no small investment in design criteria approvals.
Doubts about complication embodiments in the path of the protagonist are even subtler, and won''t be interpreted as a character flaws, even though doubt is a flaw in fact, subtle or overt, simply because it may not be interpreted this way until a preponderance of doubts make it clear to the audience. Just because you show doubt as subtle as a caress and not explosively like a trout about the head and shoulders does not disqualify it''s nature. It''s the difference between somebody saying, "That was amazing, or, that was fun" and not knowing or being able to say why, and somebody saying, "That was provocative, or that got me thinking, and here''s why." I prefer, from the artistic quality camp, to do the latter. It shows mastery. Having to show doubt like a whack up side the head reflects lack of design revisions that enhance the subtler qualities.
As our audience is aging, educated and savvy, we want to give them more for their money, and you want to challenge yourself even more creatively for your own benefit.
quote:
The way you might give them a personality quirk, to endear the chracter to the player (reader). I agree this means we don''t need to give the character flaws to get player symapthy.
Make sure you don''t make a distinction where there is none. Doubt is a flaw, though subtly portrayed might be mistaken as a quirk, but it''s not, quirks are characteristic, but not characterism.
quote:
But we''ve still got a perfect protagonist, what is used in most games today.
I believe this is more a result of programmers trying to write, and getting the basics covered, not a really truly fully developed character, and also, the industry standard for the majority of time was this simpletonian approach. As our art matures, as our medium and audience sophisticates, we will certainly need to look at revising this standard upwards, and, there are plenty of examples of this already published I am sure.
We''re just at an evolutionary point in our industry and medium, and the type of questions you are asking - basic approach challenges and clarification questions - is ample evidence you, my friend, are in the thick of the hunt for what is to come. Bravo, show us all what the next gen character should be.
I personally, saw this coming, because it was fairly obvious to a writer that games would gravitate towards subtlety simply because all artistic mediums do as they mature generally. I couldn''t think about not making every subtle aspect of story and character I could simply as a quality of design standard.
Just think what it will be like when the lifelong game comes along -- we will be going up and down empathetically with the character(s) just like a lifelong soap opera as their rising and falling fortunes mimic the tide -- you and I will be sitting in coffee shops with our laptops ten years from now weeping that our protagonist didn''t realize the princess loved him until she said so as she died saving his life because she knew he was the only one who could defeat the bad guy and save the world.
The thought of it just about makes me kvetch, frankly, but, if you don''t think Shakespearean and Operatic influences *and* implemented and designed use are heading straight for the game design business sooner or later, well, there''s nothing I can represent here reliably.
quote:
Can we instead make a game starring the player as Willy Lohman?
That''d be cool, and probably tap the sympathetic to the underdog purchase behavior on a particular market demographic. There''s a lot of women in gaming articles out there right now, and I''d say there''s better than even money that ''Days of Our Lives: Interactive'' is realistically being considered somewhere out there in the community at some point in design or implementation.
quote:
The two-fold question is:
Do video games, as a medium, require a perfect protagonist? So far everything says yes. Rayno''s suggestion is the closest so far to a maybe not, but even that seems to be a limited subset.
No, they don''t. Character design, whether perfect protagonist, flawed antihero or omnipotent antagonist is not the primary design consideration, the story you are trying to tell is. The former is a derivation of the latter. To design a character first, which I think a lot of people do, is putting the cart before the horse creatively. Some people say story is character, but imo, it is conflict, or what is at stake, and where the hands will be played and how by whom is the story. The ''whom'' is way down on that list, and should be treated as such. I know that it''s less work and meets a particular demographic segmentation to just make a ''superperfect'', unflawed master jedi ninjutsu warrior characters, and let them run amok in havocville against totally nasty evilguys, but that''s cartooning quality storytellying, not where we need to go as industry innovators, and you Jswing, are too talented for aiming too low, and I''m sorry, but I''m not going to let your forget that.
quote:
If we have to have a protagonist that is perfect, does that rule out a whole chunk of stories that we can use to make games?
Not really as a range of choices wide as an array, but it does as a height function of dramatic standards sought.
quote:
This appears to be true. Character-driven stories in a static medium (books, film), require internal conflict.
I wouldn''t say ''required'', as art is not any more black and white than interpretation is. You could say that it has proven successful here and there in these circumstances, but nothing is absolute, with perhaps the exception of physics.
quote:
I''m pretty sure this would be the same for video games, though Rayno''s suggestion might be a work-around.
The only way you are going to find out it to make one and see how it does. You know, once I stopped thinking about the money and started trying to write for the sake of telling better stories as a function of trying to improve skillsets, and challenging myself to better artistically, huh, all of a sudden I started makings some money.
As a designer, you are in control, I say show us. But it wouldn''t be fair if I didn''t say, "I''ll get to hampton before ya."
Adventuredesign
Author
Adventuredesign:
Thanks for the long and detailed post. Between you and Rayno, I''ve had my questions successfully answered (refuted, as it turns out). Unless nayone has anyting else ot add, I''m happy to call this thread closed.
JSwing
Thanks for the long and detailed post. Between you and Rayno, I''ve had my questions successfully answered (refuted, as it turns out). Unless nayone has anyting else ot add, I''m happy to call this thread closed.
JSwing
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
