If gameplay were plot, would there BE story?

1,370

June 25, 2005 12:12 AM

Quote:Original post by Wavinator
This is another thought experiment for those interested in dynamic plots...

Long description edited out for sake of brevity...

Would This Experience Be A Story?
Assuming this all happens freeform and plays differently each time, would it be considered a story? A story is usually defined as a set of events which are neatly tied together, with everything happening for a reason. But in this scenario, many events (like arguments) could repeat-- nothing is set just so such that it happens at the right time, only once.

Well, I'd consider this to be a story of sorts, but as a lot of people have pointed out it mightn't necessarily be a very good story if the system doesn't try and make it one. If the events feel disjointed from each other, repeat too often, or just feel too 'procedure' based, it won't gel. If the system however managed to pace it like a story arc, then it could work.

One way I think dynamic story could work is if you have different layers of story events that the system to work with, sort of like milestones that the form the backbone of the story arc. For a murder mystery, for example, there needs to be a murder, and the crime needs to be solved. For a murder to make sense, storywise, there needs to a motive, so that need be justfied, and so on. I guess this would work as a backward logic chaining system (not sure if I got the right terminology there).

Now I come to think of it, I'm sure I've read something similar to that example somewhere before, when I was doing some research into representations of storytelling systems. Let me just check my old notes....

Ah yes, there was a system called the Automatic Novel Writer that generated short murder mysteries developed by Sheldon Klein at the University of Wisconsin in the early 1970s. From memory, the system ran a bit like simulation, giving a log of what the characters did in a old mansion type setting, before eventually one character would murder another, a detective would arrive, and one of the other house guests would solve the murder. Here's an extract of what I summarised about this:

Quote:
The plot is created by a simulation of the behaviour of the characters using a series of bejaviour rules written by the researchers for each event in the story. Sample of the types of events are 'Two friends meet by chance, they agree to play tennis, one of the friends flirts with other friend's wife' and 'Pushing your business partner down the stairs to gain control of the business'. The system also keeps track of time, with various events occurring at different times (such as 'Tea is served at 4 p.m. All guests stop their activities when the butler serves tea'). Sove events may provide the triggers for future events (for example, flirting with someone else's spouse provides the trigger for a lover's tryst and adultery, and this tryst provides another trigger, in this case for murder). The choice of rules is done probabilistically using likelihoods determined by past events and character attributes. Each character is given a numerical value for a number of personality traits, such as attractiveness, sexd drive, intelligences and propensity for violence. Eventually, the novel writer will choose to perform one of the six murder events. This starts the chain of events that starts with the selection of a character to play detective and solve the crime.

This is from my notes, but my reference is 'Automatic Novel Writing: A Status Report; Technical Report 186, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, July 1973', so I don't know if it can be easily found on the web (I can't remember how I found it.).
I do remember that the tech. report included source code (can't remember the language though). It was basically a bunch of predesigned scenario events that slotted together to make a story.

Not sure if all this makes sense, and I can't even remember if I stayed on topic, as I should have had lunch two hours ago. Oh well, I've written too much to not include this to the discussion now!

Taolung

139

June 25, 2005 07:30 AM

Quote:Original post by Wavinator
Quote:Original post by Taolung
Sims doesn't really tell a "story" - it allows you to interact. Those are two different things.

This sounds to me like you think that story can only be told, not experienced. Would that be accurate?

Yes and no. When we watch a movie or read a book, we still experience it, and we still put ourselves into the scenario...but not in the sense you're referring to. If you mean can story be generated on the fly based on the players actions, I'd be inclined to say no.

By bringing up Sims I didn't mean to imply that this is just another variant of it - I suppose what I meant is that Sims is a genre of its own and that this kind of gameplay seems to fit into the genre.

I actually think it's a pretty neat idea, I'm just reluctant to call it "story."

The story of Star Wars is about a simple young man on a far off and forgotten world who ultimately defeats the evil Empire and restores peace to the galaxy. This story can be told any number of ways - the character interactions we see is *how* it is told. Events occur, decisions are made, and relationships are developed *specifically* to further the underlying story.

In other words, character interaction is only a tool used to tell the story.

I see "story" has being similar, in a way, to "fate." Imagine Star Wars where Luke is the player character. What if the player never chose to purchase R2D2 from the Jawas? R2 couldn't have led Luke to Obi-Wan, which ultimatley means he never would have become the last remaining Jedi and that the Rebellion may well have been destroyed by the Empire. What were the odds that R2 would have even made it to the Skywalkers in the first place? What I'm getting at is that throughout the entire story, seemingly little, random events occur to build and orchestrate a larger, dramatic story. These seemingly random character choices and events were carefully planned and orchestrated by the author in order to tell the larger story.

Now, back to the Sims:

Players can talk about the stupid funny things that characters did in the Sims - accidentally burning down the kitchen, whizzing on the sidewalk on the way to work, or getting into an arguement with their mother. This in a way provides a story, but not in a literary or theatrical way.

So I guess this is what needs clarification:

Are you talking about creating a situation where players could share stories about the things the NPC's did or said while they were playing - or, are you talking about creating a story complete with plot, pacing, direction, foreshadowing, twists, and ultimately an epic conclusion?

Terlenth

300

June 25, 2005 07:51 AM

I personally like the OP model from the standpoint that it should be used as a mode of telling the story. There should always be a general outline as to the major events in the game, but if you were to use the OP model to gain alliances make enemies etc. you could presumably never play a game the same way twice. Yes the general story is there, but if you use the OP model to determine which path is taken within the story then it will change slightly each time depending on your choices.

For example, lets say you make an alliance A, then this parties within alliance A could ask you or lead you in this direction. But, if you made alliance B instead then you would be lead in a different direction.

--Ter'Lenth

--Ter'Lenth

Ketchaval

186

June 25, 2005 08:18 AM

On a simple level I'm imagining a relationship based game with (little to no dialogue) as being based around something like Gang interaction. Something along the lines of GTA: San Andreas

You can tag territory to insult the other gangs.
Do things to improve your status ie. so called 'respect'.
The more you encroach on other gangs territory the nastier they get.

This would be a simple form of 'communication' that would work well when combined with gameplay. ie. gameplay actions translate into messages that the other gangs receive.
Also you could put in 'diplomat' functions, ie. sending worded messages to other gangs / countries asking for support / declaring war / proposing truces / making conditions for surrender (ie. I want you to release any hostages, give up your trade in this area etc.).

Of course, I don't mean to promote gangs since they are a scourge on society.
The same system could work with small states. Imagine that each state / region in a country has gone independent!

I can TOTALLY see this working! Would this be the kind of thing you are thinking about. Where character relationships are important. Of course this example is fairly simplistic in that there is a strictly defined end goal, ie. become the most powerful gang / control the most territories. or reuniting the nation in the other example. This makes it less easy to have "character motivations" beyond the gameplay goals. However, if you add in more gameplay goals (ie. things that characters can work towards) then you can start to have deeper and more subtle relationships and story.

Ie. In your example Max has a crush on Kate, but doesn't want to admit it so he volunteered for the expedition so that he could spend some more time with her, and hopefully charm the pants off her (literally).
Gordon, is in it for the gold. Because he has run up large gambling debts that he needs to pay off.
Sam is in it because he secretly loves Max, but knows that Max isn't interested in men.
Kate wants vengeance on Sam because he ran off with her boyfriend on their wedding day leaving her jilted at the altar.
Kate ALSO wants to go on the expedition because her mother Lara was a famous Tomb raiding archeologist and she wants to live up to the high expectations that her father had, of her becoming one too!

Wallace is on the expedition because he knows that the tomb they are visiting contains the holy grail. And he is prepared to kill anyone who will stop him getting his dirty little hands on it.

EDIT: also would each motivation lead up to a certain dramatic "plot" point which would reevaluate the relationship dynamics. Ie. You see Sam running off with tears running from his eyes after talking to Max. You go over and talk to Sam and he won't tell you what's going on. The next day he tells you that he came out to Max, and Max freaked out :-(. Or maybe Kate goes to talk to him and manages to calm him down, then she tells you.

[Edited by - Ketchaval on June 25, 2005 8:18:50 AM]

Wavinator

2,020

Author

June 25, 2005 05:18 PM

Wow! Lots of great feedback!

I'd like to drill down a bit further by refining this a bit more: Let's assume that the example in the OP aims to create (in terms of story) the average FPS or RPG gaming experience (IOW, you will recall the experience as being on par with the stories found in Half-Life or Baldur's Gate or -insert favorite FPS / RPG-, sans cutscenes).

With the exception of some very notable games like Shen Mue or some of the Final Fantasy games, I've believe we're talking about a narrative that is so simple it is wrong to try to compare it to a feature film or book. Story most often comes to us in cutscenes, in game interactions, exposition (briefings, notes, etc.) and scripted events. As Naz and Ketcheval have noted, these are fundamentally different experiences.

So here is a more extended question:

Given the setup in the OP as well as conflicting motivations, AND a map of locations which act to resolve and develop the plotline, at the end of playing will you be able to say "the story of this game is that..."

While playing, will you be able to say, "the story so far is that..."

If the player is in the driver's seat, it suggests many different possible "stories" arising out various interactions. As said above, if you make alliance A, things could go one way; alliance B would make them go another.

Now, given this, it seems to me that just as you should have the freedom to foul up your experiences on a level in an RPG / FPS /etc., you should be able to arrive at a suboptimal "story."

Consider the case of progressive murder: One story out come should be that everybody dies but the murderer, who gets to claim the treasure at the end of the quest.

Now you may despise that ending, but that should be motivation to replay. IOW, this means that game stories could be so fundamentally different from movie or book stories that a bad story is acceptable because it was caused by the player's actions.

--------------------Just waiting for the mothership...

Wavinator

2,020

Author

June 25, 2005 05:38 PM

Quote:Original post by Taolung
The story of Star Wars is about a simple young man on a far off and forgotten world who ultimately defeats the evil Empire and restores peace to the galaxy. This story can be told any number of ways - the character interactions we see is *how* it is told. Events occur, decisions are made, and relationships are developed *specifically* to further the underlying story.

In other words, character interaction is only a tool used to tell the story.

I see "story" has being similar, in a way, to "fate."

I think this is the notion that I'm exploring & even challenging. In a book/movie, a story is only good if it resolves a certain way. A game isn't free of the obligation to provide a good resolution, but what if that good resolution was only the result of optimal play? The only way that you get the girl, save the empire, etc., etc., is by playing well. If it doesn't happen, then that should encourage you to retry.

Quote:
Imagine Star Wars where Luke is the player character. What if the player never chose to purchase R2D2 from the Jawas? R2 couldn't have led Luke to Obi-Wan, which ultimatley means he never would have become the last remaining Jedi and that the Rebellion may well have been destroyed by the Empire. What were the odds that R2 would have even made it to the Skywalkers in the first place? What I'm getting at is that throughout the entire story, seemingly little, random events occur to build and orchestrate a larger, dramatic story. These seemingly random character choices and events were carefully planned and orchestrated by the author in order to tell the larger story.

This is such a GREAT point! [grin] And it highlights the division I'm talking about.

In a game, the player is supposed to be responsible for success and failure (events outside of his / her control are supposed to be clearly earmarked when they happen). Now the player as Luke would have to be the primary agent of success in these events for it to be a game, unless it was the typical disjoint experience of "mission briefing to provide context for repeated activity, usually combat mixed with jumping/puzzle solving/NPC dialog/etc."

While there might be a variety of summaries, what I'm talking about is that the stuff that goes on in the mission briefing / expository material is what you actually DO in game.

If plot could be gameplay, it would seem to suggest that, except for the provided activities and initial setup, there is no longer a writer as the deus ex making all these special little events happen. The player replaces him.

Quote:
Players can talk about the stupid funny things that characters did in the Sims - accidentally burning down the kitchen, whizzing on the sidewalk on the way to work, or getting into an arguement with their mother. This in a way provides a story, but not in a literary or theatrical way.

Isn't the difference here constrained wholely and completely by the subject matter?

Drop a gun in the Sims. Just this small change changes the tone, and therefore the expectation. The Sims is about maximizing resource timers that allude optimizing the running of a home and an individual's personal relationships (for the most part). Although it can depict conflict (in a very vanilla, suburban fashion), it can't cover characters planning to kill one another over such things as adultery or hidden crimes.

(It seems that as soon as you add murder to anything, even a story about a mom & pop dry cleaners or whatever, you elevate the level of drama.)

Quote:
, are you talking about creating a story complete with plot, pacing, direction, foreshadowing, twists, and ultimately an epic conclusion?

The latter with the caveat that the rules for a game might be fundamentally unique and thus not apply in all cases.

--------------------Just waiting for the mothership...

Wavinator

2,020

Author

June 25, 2005 05:43 PM

Quote:Original post by Trapper Zoid
Well, I'd consider this to be a story of sorts, but as a lot of people have pointed out it mightn't necessarily be a very good story if the system doesn't try and make it one. If the events feel disjointed from each other, repeat too often, or just feel too 'procedure' based, it won't gel. If the system however managed to pace it like a story arc, then it could work.

OOC, what would it be if it was not a story? Would you hold it in your head the same way that we hold running through a level in an FPS / RPG / RTS, as a series of events?

Thanks, btw, for the automatic writing example. It reminds me of an approach involving stringing together narrative atoms which trigger events, but I don't know how much progress has been made in that direction.

--------------------Just waiting for the mothership...

Wavinator

2,020

Author

June 25, 2005 05:59 PM

Quote:Original post by Jotaf
It doesn't necessarily stop being a story and start feeling like The Sims once the experience becomes cyclic. But if this is abused, and for a while all you do is manage relations, it's not really a story anymore (IMHO).

Well, this raises the question: What the heck are you doing moment to moment, then?

Let's piece apart a typical story at a low level to see what we have: As adventuredesign said, the mainstay is conflict. Conflict with what? Usually either internal (next to impossible in games), inter-character, or versus environment.

Several people have suggested so far some missing ingredients: Timing, pacing, constrained possibilities to hedge out absurdity.

Timing / pacing could come from where it almost always does in games, from resource contraints or rate of encounters. These could be external (proximity to enemies, amount of food) or internal (rising hatred / cooperation between two characters). Of course, the player could throw this off.

I'm going to set aside things like dialog as a harder consideration, but as for hedging out stupid events, part of that is going to involve the events the designer makes possible anyway. I won't handwave this, because emergent properties are very difficult to plan for, but I wonder if it will matter. For instance, if leaving the map on the ground would lead to a stupid story, you may want to find a way of always keeping it with the player in an in-context way.

Quote:
For this to work, the relations would have to evolve relatively slowly, with plenty of warning for what is happening. You can't make the user too obsessed with this relationships thing.

But aside from pure action tales (and even then, this applies), what are stories if not the resolution of relationships?

--------------------Just waiting for the mothership...

Madster

242

June 25, 2005 06:10 PM

Quote:it can't cover characters planning to kill one another over such things as adultery or hidden crimes.

(It seems that as soon as you add murder to anything, even a story about a mom & pop dry cleaners or whatever, you elevate the level of drama.)

quick reply to this: A friend of mine stole the neighbor's wife in The Sims. He married her and the neighbor would drop by the house to whine about it.

In Sims 2 adultery is a much more serious matter, slapping and crying involved. Haven't played it so i can't tell more, but yes it's in there.

About the sentence between the pharentesis... Brrr this is how Hollywood thinks. Cue cookie-cutter murder movies.

Back on topic:
Of course the murderer could just hop off the train whithout no one noticing and without murdering anyone else. That's a valid option and a proper story, but a very uninteresting one.

The thing is, micro-relationships hardly evolve on macro on their own unless you have specific mechanisms to encourage it.

--begin long pharentesis:
note: there's the posibility of trigerring interesting behaviour by setting tresholds and dampers to each stat. Dampers control how violently each individual's stat reacts to anything and thresholds are the breaking point when the character *must* do something about it.
Example: bladder. treshold exceeded: time to run to the bathroom. Full bar = can't hold it anymore.
So, character with high dampening seems to never be in a rush for the bathroom, character with low treshold seems to hold no liquids, high treshold spontaneously goes desperate over it.
--end long pharentesis!

Now, if this wasn't the main plot drive and only a way to 'spice it' then it sounds really good. Could be particularly good for a plot-driven game, like Syberia or such, too keep things lively. The relationships are the low level story and the fixed linear progress provides the overall plot arches.

Working on a fully self-funded project

Wavinator

2,020

Author

June 25, 2005 06:13 PM

Quote:Original post by Madster
One of the methods I had considered was predicate logic. Build a model of the starting state with relationships and etc, and then when the player (or an event or something) changes the state, re-check the model and fix the rules to keep them consistent.
Well, just today a teacher shot down that approach. Turns out that checking a model for consistency is an NP problem :(

I'm starting to see first order predicate logic make an appearance in games, but as is to be expected considering the industry, it's all in combat. (I covered a conference at GDC where the developer of Full Spectrum Warrior was employing this technology to train soldiers, and he said that the field is growing, but not a lot of the tech is being used in games.)

Quote:
On topic: Yes I'd say it is a story, and I'd be very interested in it. Of course you'd need to manage tension along the road (which I believe can be done) and you gotta have a proper satisfactory ending (which I believe will prove hard to implement).

Okay, what if the FINAL resolution to the story involves this specific Indiana Jones-style setup: A ruined Aztec city filled with traps and challenges, some of which require multiple people to solve easily, but all of which can be solved by one person.

At the end of the journey, there are two groups: Those against you, which may include the murderer if still not discovered, and those with you (which may just be you). The game then plays out like a slow-paced cat & mouse team deathmatch with everybody scrabbling for the gold. The earlier gameplay doesn't go away: There's still backstabbing, still haggling, and still combat and cooperation, but it's now in end game phase.

As a final pacing, add in some event that's going to happen, such as a storm causing flood waters to rise. Would this be a satisfactory ending, given that it would end with either you dead / defeated, or victories (with various alliances possible).

Quote:
b) a story entity. an incorporeal AI that possesess your characters and makes them *DO THINGS*. Okay that's a funny way to put it, but you could have an independent entity that shoves characters into the story. They'd go out of their normal ways when this happens. Sometimes flipping out, sometimes being heroic or whatever, just to keep things interesting.

Actually, rather than this, you can use environmental and situational drivers in a Dachel Hamet fashion: "When things get boring, throw in a gunshot." IOW, we need to detect what boredom is, and cycle in conflicts like a landslide or pack of roving wolves or enemy treasure hunters as needed.

Quote:
Wavinator is this a random idea or are you considering it for your space game?

Given everything I've been posting on the boards of late, no comment. [lol]

--------------------Just waiting for the mothership...

If gameplay were plot, would there BE story?

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

If gameplay were plot, would there BE story?

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines