While I agree (for the most part) with the 'Start, Middle and End' philosophy of the previous poster, I must say that my requirement for any "Great" story is character immersion(sp). I have to feel the characters emotions, I want to understand why the character is doing what they're doing. It's why I've prefered RPG's for so long. I still enjoy 2 & 2.5D games with great storylines

But then, I suppose that a 'Great' story can only be classified as great by those who are enjoying it. It'd be a fallacy to say that my story is the greatest ever. Of course I think so - It has, or at least should have, all of the elements that I believe make a great story. But the true judge of my story is you - the reader, watcher or player.

-Xy

PS - I did like your story for the most part though.

Quote:Original post by J-Ray
You can have both non-linear stories (CYOA) ...

The term 'non-linear story' is an oxymoron. Either it has a single ending, in which case the story leads ultimately to a single conclusion (linear, unidirectional), and all the reader is doing in CYOA is skipping some chapters.

Or it has multiple endings, in which case there is no simple answer to the question "how does it end?", which I take to be a reductio ad absurdum for anything claiming to be a story.

As for the site, I appreciate the effort put in there, but I couldn't find any solid specification for the 'VG Story Design method'. It did seem more like a collection of arguments for designing games in a particular way to facilitate story-telling. And many of the arguments I would seriously object to. Take the following for example:

Quote:As previously discussed, to create game stories on the level of film and literature, the game world must be saturated with unique, conflicted characters.

Typical Video Games: One central character
Greatest Stories Ever: Many characters

Clearly, the right step towards great game story is to add more central characters. But how do we do this? The answer is: Multiple playable characters.

Please god no. I can't stand it when games drag focus between different characters. Makes me feel like I'm just pushing the story along, which seems to be exactly what you want. If I wanted a good story, I'd read a good book, or watch a good movie. Paraphrasing the above:

Typical Story: Many characters
Greatest Video Games Ever: One character

Quote:Original post by J-Ray
You can have both non-linear stories (CYOA)...

No, you can't. Choose Your Own Adventure is a collection of linear stories employing the same characters, settings and chronological placement, with overlapping developments. Turning it into a game where you select one of the possible developments at a branch point does not change the fact that, if you play through it, you have experienced a single, linear story.

(Which implies, btw, that stimarco did not use tautology incorrectly. Your enthusiasm for writing is admirable, but don't let it overshadow your linguistic facility. Playing semantic word games is not cute.)

Quote:Also, in regards to the incompatibility of linear story and games...

No one has suggested that linear story and games are incompatible, per se. There are simply minor presentation problems, like the linear narrative being subverted if I fail a challenge because, obviously, my experience of the story now ends "...but he died before reaching Valhalla", or whatever.


Besides, everyone knows that the greatest video game story ever is this: "One day, Billy's girlfriend, Marian, is kidnapped off the street and the Lee brothers receive a message from her captors, the Black Warriors, demanding to know the secrets of Sōsetsuken in exchange for her safety." [smile]

Quote:Original post by stimarco
Look at the classic shows of the '50s and '60s, like "The Outer Limits" and "The Twilight Zone", with episodes written by noted authors like Ellison, Heinlein and Asimov. It *is* possible to write interesting stories that extrapolate today's science and technology in an intelligent fashion. And they're usually much better than recycling tired tropes that were already clichés back in the 1940s.

I must call into question the use of the Twilight Zone as an example of proper use of a story. I mean, one of the story lines was "Baby falls off bed, rolls into portal to the 4th dimension. Parents can't find her, call physicist friend, friend finds portal. Father enters portal (which is just like the 3rd dimension except with lots of fog and odd camera angles, BTW) and gets the baby". This is in an "intelligent fashion"? I'm sorry, but we're clearly thinking of different intelligences here.

Sure, some of them were interesting and well done, but most of those didn't even take place in the future. I find it sad that authors of the likes of Heinlein and Asimov would waste their time on shows like the Twilight Zone - and I do know the Twilight Zone; I've watched nearly every one since a local movie rental store went out of business and sold them all at $1 a piece. The Outer Limits I haven't seen, though, so I will refrain from comment on that.

My own rant. [grin] I'd use Asimov's and Heinlein's actual works as much better examples of plausible science fiction. "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" and "The Foundation Trilogy" come to mind as mostly believable science fiction. And now I'll leave before we get *completely* off topic.

Quote:Original post by Oluseyi
Besides, everyone knows that the greatest video game story ever is this: "One day, Billy's girlfriend, Marian, is kidnapped off the street and the Lee brothers receive a message from her captors, the Black Warriors, demanding to know the secrets of Sōsetsuken in exchange for her safety." [smile]

LOL, yeah, Double Dragon is digital Shakespeare. I'm secretly (now publicly) hoping we see a Double Dragon Vs. Bad Dudes in the vein of the new Marvel Vs. Mortal Kombat. God, if you grant me this wish... :)

As for those of you completely absorbed with exposing redundant, oxymoronic tautologies (how'd ya like that?), all I have to say is:

I didn't invent the term "non-linear story."

Stilmarco, Argus, Oluseyi: Google it and, if you still have semantic beef, take it up with the D&D fanboys of the 70s.

Quote:Original post by J-Ray
I didn't invent the term "non-linear story."

Stilmarco, Argus, Oluseyi: Google it and, if you still have semantic beef, take it up with the D&D fanboys of the 70s.

Screw 'em. We're talking linguistics here, and there are no valid linguistic resources on the topic. Top Google result is an article... on GameDev. Then it's a Wikipedia page about linearity in games, and an abstract about locating archaeological artifacts, with some interspersed blog cruft.

Your appeal to popularity has failed (and is a distressingly poor substitute for sound reasoning and/or research in a discussion that began with definitive and academic pretensions).

I've read through your articles. First off, your articles seemed well written with good presentation from my quick read through, and you express your opinion well. Despite that I disagree with your storytelling philosophy, I have to give you kudos for that!

Now to the nitty-gritty of dissecting your advice [smile].

My biggest beef with the school of thought that games should slavishly follow film rules is that computer games are not films! They each have their own specific set of strengths and weaknesses when it comes to storytelling, and ignoring this means you'll neuter the expressive power of the medium. The real question isn't "how can I tell a film style story through a computer game" but "how can I use the medium of a computer game to tell a story?"

Films and games might have superficial similarities; they've both got the capacity for flashy graphics and soaring audio, and in modern 3D games you've also got camera cinematographic issues to worry about. But the one big difference is the involvement of the audience. Film is strictly a passive medium - the most interactivity the audience can hope for is when they get the ability to pause or rewind their DVD. Computer games however are active - your audience will expect a level of interactivity somewhere in their experience otherwise it is no longer a game. In a way, games have closer parallels to stage plays than film. As well as the character inside your story, you've also got to worry about the audience members in the room as well - and they can be given the power to interject with the actors.

The problem with using film too deeply as the basis for your game story stems from the relationship with the player to the story. The player has to be involved somehow, and in almost all cases does so in the guise of the main protagonist. The thorny issue for writers is you've now lost some control of your leading character to the audience in the form of the player, who doesn't have a grasp over the world of the story or the roles and past lives of the characters therein and may well have conflicting interests with you the writer in which way they want their protagonist avatar to act.

So the writer's got a big problem - they've cast the player in the leading role in their story. There's a big issue of control here: who has control over the protagonist; the writer, the player, or a collaboration between both? And if it's a collaboration, where are the lines of control drawn?

Now we get to the crux of the issue. At this point, the film approach to story writing says "Nooooooo! The protagonist is too important to the plot to leave to the mercy of a complete maverick like the player! My beautiful story will be ruined! When it comes to story, I must have have complete control!" They are loath to relinquish any control of the protagonist to the player when it comes to anything plot important. Since the player has to have some control for it to be a game there needs to be some interaction, but a film based plotline dictates that this control cannot extend to anything that might influence the main plot path. The player can be trusted to get from plot point A to plot point B, but cannot be trusted to make the "right choices" once they get there.

Most of the points you put in your article are pointing to solutions that involve taking control away from the player. For example:

• Multiple endings are bad, because multiple endings involve choice, and choice involves relinquishing power of the story over to the player.
  
• Blank slate characters are bad, because when properly implemented (like Link in Zelda games) a blank slate character is perfect representation of the relationship between the player and the game story, but that doesn't lend itself well to the types of stories that the writer wants to make
  
• Player customisation of the protagonist is bad for the same reason as above: it enhanced the feeling of ownership the player has over the protagonist and makes life more difficult for the writer.
  
• Single central characters also reinforce the connection with the player to the protagonist, so that's bad too.
  
• Cut scenes are good because they give the writer absolute complete control - the player is completely helpless in a cutscene and just along for the ride.
  
• Telling the story through the environment is bad because it isn't traditional and letting the player protagonist stumble across the story on their own doesn't involve the writer taking control over the protagonist and by extension the story.
  

The strictly linear writer-control-freak approach to game story writing has one big advantage, which is that it's easy to tell the story the writer wants. Really easy; just write the script the traditional way and hopefully jam a game into it. But it's not at all innovative and is a step back from where game stories will go. It'd be as if film never got past telling stories by sticking a fixed camera in front of a theatre stage.

That's probably enough out of me for now. To close, I'll reiterate that I consider a great game story to be one that uses the strengths of the medium to the hilt, and you aren't going to achieve that by forcing a film script down your player's throats. You need to take into account that you as a writer can share control with your protagonist with your player, and in doing so end up with a much more appropriate story for your games. Yes, this means that you won't be able to implement a direct analogue of your favourite film writing techniques in all cases, but that's part and parcel of being a game writer rather than a film writer.

(Oh, and also another reiteration that despite the ire expressed here I thought your article was well presented [wink]).

Quote:Original post by MSW
Okay, does this "system" allow for games driven by stories such as romantic comedies (like: Say Anything)? Character studies (Lost in Translation)? Historical drama(Roots)? Comeing of age drama(Stand by Me)? Dark comedy (Throw Mama From The Train)? Character driven horror (Misery)? Ensemble driven comedy (American Pie)?

Yeah, the movie and TV industry makes lots of high concept popcorn flavored action flicks...But they also make a much wider range of story driven films/shows than video games have had the balls to attempt. Armed with your blueprint are video games capable of this? Honestly?

Hey MSW,

Honestly? Yes, absolutely, no question about it.

I'm a big believer games can have great story but, like you, I believe films, novels and television are superior narrative mediums.

As for the non-traditional game genres, here are a couple examples: Far Cry 2 is only one degree away from Blood Diamond. Bioshock is the next Pirates of the Caribbean. Throw a couple great characters into Myst and you're stylistically close to Lost in Translation. Shed the cliche dialogue and Resident Evil and Silent Hill give Misery a run for the money. Coming of age seems to be the theme behind every JRPG ever made. Comedy? We've had many great comedy games.

Hell, Sims and the scores of bizarre DS games out of Japan cover nearly every narrative genre ever invented.

I'll concede there is one film that can have no game equal: My Dinner with Andre.

That said, I think the point you're trying to make is not about genre, but about quality. Can games achieve story equal to, or better than, their film counterparts?

Again, yes.

But it comes down to the writers, directors and actors and VG Story Design is an attempt to give them more tools to advance their stories.