Looking to design a learning game that teaches formal, critical thinking. The demographic would be those who have never taken a critical thinking course or a logic course. But I just don't know what to use to create it. I'm a novice in programming but have the motivation to put in the time to learn.
Starting the user out slow, focusing on argument form and the nature of arguments, how to identify the issue being discussed, identifying and evaluating value and descriptive assumptions, moving on to fallacies, types of evidence and their relative strengths/weaknesses, etc. Maybe adding sections on types of logic (syllogistic, propositional, predicate, modal.
More of a focus on text-based learning and interaction, but with images, animations, maybe video (I don't know).
Think of it as a modern and more interactive version of Logicola (it's ok if you don't know what that is).
So it isn't graphics heavy, definitely not 3D or even 2D platform sort of game. Maybe something similar to the JackBox games on Steam, but not entirely sure at this point.
Thoughts? What are some good possibilities to use for such a project? I'd like to be able to market it, perhaps on Steam, maybe even to education institutions.
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.
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. Links
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.
So thought I'd throw this out here.
The game is multiplayer, kind of an mmo/moba hybrid. The setting is low fantasy and I'm trying to keep magic subdued. There is a strong emphasis on vehicles and siege type weapons, and naval combat is a large part of the game.
Right now I'm focusing on naval combat, that's where most of the functionality has been fleshed out. Currently I have the equivalent of ballistas and catapults, I call them bolt thowers and lobbers right now. Probably also worth mentioning that you build your own ships. You get a choice of hulls that are premade, and then you can place weapons/armor, etc.. All of it crafted.
SO anyways current naval combat is lobbers do damage to the ship itself primarily, plus some small splash damage to weapons. Bolt throwers do high damage vs mounted weapons, low damage to the ship structure itself.
But what I want is to have more support type effects. Something similar to Eve online logistics. Right now the best idea I have is crystals. I've started to run with it as it's the best I have, but it's in the early stages. So now ships have sails and a crystal drive for power. You can be using one or the other not both. Crystals drives move slower but can go backwards (solves a practical issue).
On the combat side I'm starting to try and flesh out the idea of a crystal 'turret'. Since I want magic subdued, these turrets for the most part just provide buffs/debuffs. I'm also thinking that I need classes for combat ships, to constrain ships to either having the normal weapons or the crystal turret, support vs damage dealer concept.
I also started to kind of run with some other ideas around crystals. The game is made up of regions/zones, and I'm thinking of having the origin of crystals being they fall from the sky, maybe some neighbor planets collided resulting in all these crystal fragments that occasionally fall. So if I create a shower of valuable crystals in an area, that should be a good way to get pvp action going. This also feeds into doing more with the treasure hunting mechanic I wanted, so oceans over time would build up more and more crystals. And when a new region is discovered, it could have a lot of them.
In any case I'm not entirely certain about the crystal idea so was looking for some more feedback. I am certain about a lot of the underlying mechanics and abilities, so I'm pushing forward using crystals. If I change gears it won't effect much of the implementation.
I think the biggest part of what I'm not certain about is can I subdue the magical feeling of crystals. Like if I can come up with some science behind why they work like they do. For instance maybe the core of the planet is made of some material that gives power to the crystals. Or if the crystals drop from the sky, their power could come from how close to the sun they got (if they originated from say another broken planet on the other side of the sun). Anything to avoid the whole idea of 'magic crystal'.
ROY - Color Combination Game for Android, Requesting Feedback but also Giving feedback on your Game!By Atwo Studios
I'm Anthony From Atwo Studios. My partner and I are creating a color combination game that will be available for Android. We are currently in beta for our game and are requesting feedback on anything in the game! If you think something sucks or is really good let us know! We are open for all suggestions. If you are developing a game too let us know because we are more than happy to give feedback and help you develop the best game possible!
Thanks for taking the time to read this post and hopefully watch the video! It's one of my first dev video's so if you think it sucks its okay i know!
Feel free to drop a link for anyone you would like to show off, Hope to hear from you soon!
You can visit our website atwostudios.com more information on the game and on our company!
Hi guys, check out our new game about sticks. Feedback welcome!
Download on Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.stickman.dismount.heroes
Stickman Dismount 3 Heroes is a sequel to the legendary game of survival, where to make incredible tricks, driving different transport and getting into different crash! The game is made in the best traditions of simulator games with ragdoll physics elements. Make incredible jumps and tricks and destroy the enemy! Your task is make the finish alive or dead!