You can't do tragedy?

Started by
19 comments, last by Wavinator 23 years, 7 months ago
With the way games are, it seems to me that a story with the player as the center of a great tragedy would be impossible. Let me explain: In a game, you expect to win. Losing is a sign of failure. Yet exploration of failure and loss are what tragedy in narrative is all about. Does this mean that tragedy can never happen to the player, and thus only experienced through remotely through supporting characters? I''m thinking, by the way, of my favorite Russian novel Darkness at Noon by Arthur Koestler. The story is great, but the hero dies at the end. You''re left with the impression that although it''s terrible that he dies, it''s completely right and appropriate. The novel would have been lame if it ended any other way. Hmmmm.... I think if we don''t figure this one out we may find ourselves in a narrative cage, doomed to doing nothing more than Disney-quality endings (everything always turns out for the best... awwwwwwwwww) -------------------- Just waiting for the mothership...
--------------------Just waiting for the mothership...
Advertisement
I can''t say much about this because I''m not a great writer at all, but I know for sure what''s my favorite game. Planescape : Torment.

I like it because it has a very sad ending, a great plot and story, and also because all the characters have a real personnality, making it harder to loose/leave them.

However, I didn''t feel like I just loose, but rather like I just released someone (actually that''s sort of what the game is about).

Anyway, I found it great because of that tragic feeling, enhanced by the sad lifes of your companions. I wish than Black Isle Studio would release more titles like this one, rather than Baldur''s Gate 2, Icewind Dale and so on.

just my 0.02$
quote:Original post by MuteAngel

However, I didn''t feel like I just loose, but rather like I just released someone (actually that''s sort of what the game is about).



Yeah, this is sort of what I''m talking about, althought I might be wrong since I haven''t played Torment yet: This sounds like a case of victory within defeat.

I''m rather talking about simply appropriate defeat itself. It''s that that I think we can''t do.



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
--------------------Just waiting for the mothership...
I for one would like to see more thougt-provoking endings, rather than the standard "You've saved the world! Yay, and so forth!". Sure, for some games games (well, most, even) this is suitable. I wouldn't want Phantasy Star 4 to end any other way that it does (that is, a happy "saved the world + get a girl" ending).

(pause)

Hrm.. actually, that ending does have a sad/melancholy part to it too... so.. anyway, back to what I was saying...

I vaguely remember playing a game where the ending wasn't a standard happy one, and I enjoyed it. I guess what I'm trying to say is that having a "non-standard" ending allows for deeper and more meaningfull games, along with the fact that they make your game stand out. Sure, some people might complain, but hey, its *art*

Anyway, I'd just like to see a game sometime that leaves me saying "...wow.". Using elements of tragedy would probably be a good way to do that.

Hrm.. One more thing, I played a game called "nocturnal illusion" once. It was set in this depressing quasi-dimension thingy.. sort of a place where lost souls go, or something. Anyway, at the end you could choose one companion to accompany you back to the real world. You won the game, but you kind of feel back because you left many others back there for eternity. Kind of sad, but it made the game memorable (well... it was memorable for other, um.. reasons too.. but ...hehe)

Wow... I just keep thinking of more stuff to say...

I guess I'd just like to see a game that uses elements of tragedy (or is a tragedy (well, not one where the execution or gameplay is described as a "tragedy")), or perhaps something where placing the phrase "so it goes..." that was so often used in Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse 5" seems more appropriate than "The End".

Variety in games is never a bad thing... probably.


Edited by - A. Buza on September 15, 2000 7:56:27 PM
I hate happy endings. It makes me feel like I've wasted my time. I'd much rather have an ending which reveals some thought provoking idea rather than some prepackaged cliched ending.

In other words, I think that unhappy/unstandard endings will actually improve upon the game greatly. It'd be a large step towards having much more meaningful games.

----------------------------------------
"Before criticizing someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
Then, when you do criticize them, you will be a mile away and have their shoes." -- Deep Thoughts

Edited by - The Senshi on September 15, 2000 6:33:33 PM
i suppose that one way to work around this is to have multiple endings (although i really hate them). one happy ending....one tragedy. it is not a solution...but something used quite often in action/adventure games.

-Luxury
Along with tragedy comes choices, mainly the choice between some virtuous action which will have grave consequences, and some base action which will save the character''s skin. A couple of examples off the top my head are Hamlet''s acceptance of the duel and Socrates'' noble defence in Appology of Socrates. Both of these characters decided that their virtue and ideals were more important than their very lives. The question, of course, is which choice is the greater tragedy, the loss of virtue or the loss of life?

Similar choices should confront the player. A quick example: you are the King''s personal assassin, the king''s son wants to kill you. However, you previously pledged yourself to King and Country, so do you as player assassinate the prince, or play the loyal King''s Man and possibly die at the hands of his son (after doing his duty to protect the king himself)? (This example is from the book Royal Assassin, btw) Or at the end of the game your character may end up being poisoned, does he give the antidote to his friend and leader, or take it himself?

Should the use of fatal choices be made into a dramatic construct, martyring players could become the next big pasttime

-Joe
Wavinator, once again, I think you''re wrong If you were to do a reall WELL EXECUTED tragedy it is my belief that it would be heralded as a masterpiece by most of the gaming public. But then again, it''s never been done, so how am I to really know?
Hmmmmmm.... I don''t think I''m making something clear.

We''ve all probably read purely tragic stories. I''m thinking right now of Greek myth and Oedipus being hounded to death by the Furies. Or the movie Arlington Road (where the badguys win in the end) Or maybe even China Town (where again the guilty go unpunished).

What I''m talking about isn''t a bittersweet ending, where the character loses his life but gains a victory for something greater (like in the movie Gladiator). I''m talking about complete and utter defeat, and the associated catharsis that is supposed to come with it.

This is what seems to be in opposition to a game, because a game is ostensibly about winning something (even if you lose something in the process).





--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
--------------------Just waiting for the mothership...
Tough to do.

Many games today distance the player from any real sense of conflict or consequences. If the player''s goals are to stay alive and finish the game, they won''t really care if they murder half the other game tokens to get there.

How would the player make a good choice? Choose A and bad things happen. Choose B and worse things happen. yuk.

The closest I''ve seen are games that play with some heavy themes (Planescape:Torment and Blade Runner come to mind), bu tI wouldn''t really consider them tragedies.

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement