Variety Friday: Story Telling in Games

This Variety Friday I will be talking about story telling in games.  It is much too broad of a subject to cover all aspects of in one article, so I will be specifically focusing on the different ways developers tell the stories. 

First I’m going to talk about a seemingly less used method today as of 5+ years ago, which is dialog with non-voiced characters.  This method is very popular in indie games, due to the cost of quality voice acting.  The first con with this, is that it requires players to read blocks of text at a time, which can make the game see more like a graphic novel than an actual game.  All though this method can produce great games with great stories, it is usually harder to pull off and at a smaller scale. 

There are some indie examples such as “One Chance” which show of a simplified version of this method.  And, there have been a few cases where this was done and created great AAA games (I use AAA as a term to describe games made with a large team over a longer period of time w/ a nice budget).  A good example of these would be the Pokémon games.  But, an even better example would be Dragon Age: Origins.  Origins actually did more of a hybrid system, having the main character not talk, and have all the NPCs voiced.

What this was able to accomplish was something almost no game, not even WoW can achieve, which was feeling that the character in game was an actual representation of you, that you were the character!  The reason for this is that you got to fully be the character, choose who to like and hate, choose what you want to say, what choices to make, how to make your character look, what race and origin, and etc.  All this added up to something nearly unheard of in a game, which was allowing you to feel that you were the character.  A lot of people took this for granted and didn’t like having to read full paragraphs of dialog options and thought it interrupted the gameplay, I disagree, I believe what it did was allowed you to think about the choices and choose carefully exactly what you wanted to say and happen, unlike in mass effect where it summarizes the choices, and is partly vague allowing for some unwanted outcomes.

Now conveniently, I will be discussing the other main Bioware method, which is to tell a story through a character which has a certain back-story and name, and you just control him and make all of the choices.  The few main differences between this, and the method discussed before, is that the main character is voiced in this method, you usually don’t get to know exactly what he’ll say, and he has a set name and back-story, and usually doesn’t have as broad an amount of choices to make.  Examples of games that use this method are Mass Effect 1 & 2, and Dragon Age 2. 

Most gamers say they prefer this method, either for lack of reading, or for a more cinematic feel.  I do agree that, at some times, this method does produce a more cinematic and “eye-catching” experience, but the first one is just due to damn laziness.  While this can give a more cinematic experience, what it doesn’t do is form that special link between the character, and the player.  Though due to player preference, this method is being used less often now, such as in Dragon Age 2 where they used the same system as Mass Effect.  Another problem, which arises from an Origin – Mass Effect comparison, is that with Origins the choices aren’t described as “right and wrong” but are more along the lines or moral choices with impactful outcomes.  Unlike Mass Effect in which everything is defined as good or bad, and it doesn’t really allow for any “middle ground” or moral choices that don’t necessarily mean you’re a good or bad person, but just reflect your personal view on the problem.  I personally believe developers need to branch away from this system and try what Origins did, but that’s just me.  It’s still a pretty good system allowing for great stories and you will see it around for years to come.

The most popular kind of story telling in games, by far, is having a character with his own voice, back-story, and actions, while the player just plays through events as the character, not offering much choice.  This includes the par Call of Duty storytelling, to the great Red Dead: Redemption system.  Though Red Dead still offer some choice and a lot more freedom, at its core it is still the same system as other games.  The reason this is most often used is because it is easy to force players to do certain things, than account for hundreds of different options, taking into account every detail.

Next is a game that allows your actions to impact the game, but not as broadly as having set forth choices, not everything is straight forward, and you usually don’t know the exact consequences of your actions, most current example being LA Noire.  You do play as a character with a defined back story and blah blah blah, but you also make impactful decisions which, unlike Mass Effect, aren’t clearly defined.  While in LA Noire on the other hand, depending on how good you are at interrogating and using evidence, it could severally impact you in the short, and long run.  I didn’t like not being able to give your personal opinion on “I don’t think he’s guilty, don’t charge him just yet” which is one of the flaws of the game, but I’m not going to hold it against it that much.

LA Noire also excels at “story through setting” partly due to the game having a huge 8 square mile map with everything detailed and polished.  If you want to feel even more engulfed in the game, then play it in Black and White, which really gives it a Noire feel you won’t find in any other game.  Though it does have cons such as not allowing opinion to come into play and the game not being as personal as it could be, the system still works pretty well with LA Noire.

Next is something which even I have a hard time of explaining, I will just say “A game in which you play, control, and make choices as multiple characters who all don’t only have their own back-story, but thoughts”.  Of course I am talking about Heavy Rain here.  What really made the game stand out, besides its ingenious control system, is that you do play as multiple characters, and the choices you make as each one, largely differ the final confrontation.  Why is this good you ask?  It allows you to gain an almost “Emotional Attachment” to the main character.  After playing the prologue you get a main idea about him and after seeing his past, you really feel towards the main character.

More games need to try to not only tell a story but try to give the player an emotional attachment with the characters in game, which is what I believe is so great about what Heavy Rain did.  I also think the multiple viewpoints idea should be used for more games, definitely not all games, but some.

The final form of storytelling in gaming I’m going to talk about can be a little controversial, but I believe it still counts, and that is table-top gaming, more so, Dungeons and Dragons.  D&D allows a group of friends to sit down and not only go on epic adventures, but also just allow people to have fun.  It is a lot more open than most games because choices are only limited to how much fun the DM is willing to have.  I honestly believe that Dungeons and Dragons is still one of the, if not the best way to not only tell stories, but do it with other people, it brings a multiplayer aspect into RPGs, something that current AAA games have been struggling at, yet it did it first.  If you are looking for a long adventure where you get to make choices and have fun, then D&D is still one of the best options even at the current point of the industry.

So overall there are many different methods to storytelling in gaming; am I saying one method is superior, no.  Am I saying that there is still a lot of improvement that needs to come out of storytelling in video games, definitely.  The reason I brought up D&D besides the fact that it does still count as a form of storytelling in gaming, is that it really is a much improved system over most current RPGs.

Variety Friday: Innovation Isn't Gone

Innovation is a word that gets thrown around all the time in many different contexts.  That main thing I hear is that there isn’t enough innovation in the gaming industry.  Now first, innovation doesn’t necessarily mean a completely new game like a game where you shoot small projectiles which turn whatever you hit into your evil minions,  and to, in return, have great “environment interactive gameplay”.  It can be as simple as using two different concepts together, or just doing something generic differently.

Now a good example of innovation just in the past week is Brink.  Yes, it didn’t get the best reviews, but some people did still like it, but I’m not talking about gameplay, just innovation.  Brink combined class-based shooter elements along with parkour and an interesting new objective system.  With shooters being very bland this year (with a few exceptions of course like Crysis 2) it is nice to see something different, having more “freedom of movement” in a shooter is a great way to mix it up.  But what Brink got right is that they didn’t focus entirely on their parkour, instead they just used it as a supporting element within the game and made it optional and up to the player of when/if to use it. 

It also had the objective system which worked so-so.  What it did do was not only having different objectives to focus on, but also make each class feel more “differing” due to objectives being class specific.  Yes, they may have put too much focus on the sub-objectives but it was still a nice idea.  What I believe would have been better is completely different ways to win the game and having different options for each class, while also having certain sub-objectives to give your team a distinct advantage.

For example say there are three classes; a soldier, a recon, and an engineer (which doubles as a medic).  To help complete the mission the soldier could rig an important building to explode, but perhaps have it so that you needed “money” for charges such as Homefront so you couldn’t always place them.  Then they could have sub-objectives of destroying enemy generators or turrets.  Recons could be working towards sneaking into the enemy complexes and hacking the building’s mainframes, because the building wasn’t destroyed the new building could provide some kind of production bonus, but also allow the enemies to capture it back.  Their sub-objectives could involve hijacking enemy vehicles or using strategic EMP attacks.

While engineers could work on driving vehicles and coordinating a bombardment attack on a key enemy structure which would take longer but ultimately get the job done.  While having sub-objectives such as repairing deployed buildings/platforms and advancing the frontlines with tech.  What this all points to is an objective based system in which everyone is valuable to the team due to having important and game changing side objectives and the ability to advance the game as any class.

But Brink was just one example of innovation in the current gaming market.  There was also Crysis 2, a game based around not just shooting, but options.  It allowed you to choose how to complete the objectives, sure it wasn’t that broad but it still worked along with the visor giving “tactical advice”.  As mentioned in last Variety Friday there are also a lot of indie games showing great innovation!  And then you can’t forget Portal 2, the sequel to one of the most innovative games to come out of a large name for a while, sure it wasn’t long but it was a puzzle game and a FPS, while also delivering narrative in a way not done before, and Portal 2 didn’t disappoint, doing the same things as its older brother.  But even some smaller games which weren’t as well publicly received and still had problems provided entertainment and innovation such as Hydrophobia, a game which focuses on using your environment to kill enemies, your environment and water.  This also showcases innovation on a technically standpoint, because this game had some of the best and most realistic water I have seen from a video game, and again it was used in gameplay to compliment the rest of the game.

So what I am getting at is that people need to stop using “Innovation”, or lack of it, as an excuse to blame all their problems and dislikes on the industry and the developers.  Sure this may be relevant in some cases such as Call of Duty, but the industry is still blooming with innovation, you just need to know where to look! 

Besides, if you really have a craving for innovation, you can always check out some older games which still show innovation not seen in this current industry, such as the original Deus Ex and Knights of the Old Republic.  As the industry take more risks (such as Brink) and learn from their mistakes, there will be much more innovation in the coming years, which in the end will be good for the Industry and the gamers.

Variety Friday: An Indie Game PSA

“Indie Games” means a different thing to everyone.  To some it means those crappy wanna be games, others, those small games which aren’t much more than 2D Platform and zombie games.  Then there are those that actually understand that Indie Games are games generally created on a low budget and created by a small studio/group of people.  There isn’t really a set line between Indie and full on Commercial games, but they are usually easy to spot because they weren’t created by a big studio or a large known publisher. 

What people usually don’t understand is that Indie Games play a very large part in the larger picture of gaming.  Usually the best place to find innovation in the gaming industry is indie games, and innovation is one of the major factors that moves the industry forward.  I’m not saying innovation can’t come from publishers (one example being Portal) but that you can generally find a lot more innovation from indie titles.  One of the biggest pluses for indie developers is that they usually aren’t under the pressure of deadlines or budgets, so they can work at their pace and make good games and not have to worry about the profits as much.

Also, simply, a lot of good indie games come out which can bring hours of enjoyment.  There are a few main factors for why this is; one of which being their relatively low price.  Indie games generally range from Free to $20 max.  So whether you’re gaming on a budget or are just looking for some cheap fun, indie games really are the perfect fix.  This may sound contradictory, but in some ways indie games are more polished/complete than AAA titles.  Yes the commercial titles have the large amount of testing under their belt, but Indies don’t work on strict time tables.  So while they may be slightly more buggy, they usually don’t suffer from what most games do, which is feeling like the game was rushed and isn’t finished.  The other plus is that indie devs can focus more on the gameplay aspects and if something doesn’t work, change it.

Another thing about indie development is that they can be on nearly any platform.  Such as flash, as just about all flash games are technically small indie games.  Others include the 360 (with their Indie Games Marketplace) iPhone, Android, and PC with the numerous engines available even for free (such as Unity and Source SDK) along with the multiple development platforms that accept indie games from Steam to even OnLive, just to name a few.

Right, well since it hasn’t been apparent yet, the point of this Variety Friday is to inform you that you should support indie games.  Even if you’re a COD fanboy, the magic about indie games is that there are games that can appeal to almost anyone.  From the puzzle lovers, to the story based game lovers, to the shooter/zombie lovers there is something for you on many platforms.  Though, why specifically you should support them, is for the reasons I listed above.  They really do bring great innovation to the industry and are probably going to end up playing an even larger role in the industries future.

How do you support indie games you ask?  Well it is actually quite simple.  Go checkout Steam, the Xbox marketplace, the app store, or whatever your preferred form of distribution is, and just look at some indie games, and find a few that seem like they’ll interest you and play them.  Next, try to keep track of the indie trends and watch for some new releases and just try to be a little involved, it would make the industry better for everyone.

Now, some of my favorite indie games.

PC

• AaaAaaaAAaa: A Reckless Disregard for Gravity
• Trine
• Braid

Flash

• One Chance
• Today I Die
• Loved

Xbox Live Indies

• Solar
• Kaleidoscope
• Abadddon
• Breeze

Xbox Live Arcade

• Monday Night Combat
• Super Meat Boy

Enjoy!