Thursday, February 04, 2010
Game Design - Pulp Fiction - and Games, Part 2
Let's continue on with Lester Dent's pulp fiction formula and gaming. I want to make a few notes before moving forward:a) I'm not advocating adherence to formula, ESPECIALLY not a formula created for a completely different medium. I'm more interested in understanding why the formula worked, and how some elements might be applied to help make more interesting stories in video games.
b) Dent's formula is intended for pulp-action thrillers, which share many similarities to most game stories, but definitely not all. It's an even looser fit for a comedic game like The Secret of Monkey Island (or Frayed Knights) - but the comparisons are probably still appropriate.
c) A great game and a great story are two different things - and often the goals of story and gameplay are at odds with each other. IMO, the best we can do is find a nice sweet spot somewhere in the vast field between them. But Dent's little formula is far from the only way to tell a good story, and it's certainly not a limiting factor in making a great game. We're digging for ideas here, not criticisms.
What Should Happen First
Dent next talks about what should happen in the first 1500 words. That's about... uh, six pages of text, and about nine minutes of reading time. We'll say ten minutes. The first ten minutes of a game are pretty critical, too. While I give RPGs and adventure games a little more leeway than I do, say, a FPS, the fact remains that if a game hasn't hooked me in within the first ten to twenty minutes, I probably won't play it long enough to enjoy the other 1490 minutes of fabulous story and gameplay it promises.
This also represented the first quarter of a 6,000 word pulp adventure story. So some of these ideas might be more appropriate for something to happen in the first, say, quarter of a game than in the first ten or twenty minutes.
But regardless, there are some valuable nuggets of advice to be mined here. So what advice does Lester Dent give to writers for the first ten minutes of his pulp action story? And do they apply to game stories, especially adventures and RPGs?
Introduce the Hero and Swat Him with Trouble
"First line, or as near thereto as possible, introduce the hero and swat him with a fistful of trouble. Hint at a mystery, a menace or a problem to be solved--something the hero has to cope with."I don't know if there's a more appropriate tidbit of advice for games to steal. Nevermind that Dent ends sentences with a preposition (I do, too).
While some modern games (I'm looking at YOU, Final Fantasy XII!) might get a little too excited to show off their cool CGI opening sequences to get around to introducing the hero, that's not usually much of a problem.
The part about the menace is a bit more interesting. I don't know if this is usually done in the name of a gentle introduction or what, but too often the real trouble or menace or some other form of compelling need is doled out a little slowly, especially in RPGs. Instead, you find out about rats in Matilda's basement that need to get cleared out if you find the time...
The interesting thing here is that Dent seems to suggest that the hero and the conflict / menace / whatever be introduced almost simultaneously. This may not be the true menace of the overall storyline, but it should be a hint of it. In a variation I've found in some stories (and games), the hero may be completely unaware of the menace - but the audience (reader / player) is not. It's been made clear in an intro sequence or prologue or some sort of foreshadowing that Something Bad is on a collision course with the hero.
I think there are more good examples, at least among commercial CRPGs of the last decade or so, than bad ones. While the use of an amnesiac hero is unfortunately a bit trite on its own, Eschalon: Book 1 opens with a nice personal mystery of his own identity. In Fallout, the Vault Dweller is introduced pretty much simultaneously with the need to locate a replacement water chip. Aveyond starts with a battle between a demon warrior and a priestess, embroiling young Rhen in a rescue and world-shaking matters before she's even old enough to do much about it. Ultima VI starts with the protagonist - the Avatar - kidnapped by gargoyles and about to be made a sacrifice upon an altar before being rescued by old friends - pursued by gargoyles the whole time.
Jumping Into the Fray
"The hero pitches in to cope with his fistful of trouble. (He tries to fathom the mystery, defeat the menace, or solve the problem.)"It SHOULD go without saying here, but the player (or at least the character) should have a chance to deal directly (but perhaps unknowingly) with the Looming Threat as quickly as possible.
Instead of, say, grinding for XP to take out rats first.
Of course, the player character at this point is probably not quite ready to impact the forces of unpleasantness in any noticeable fashion, but that's besides the point. A token victory, or simply obtaining a clue that can set the player character(s) on the path may be all that is needed.
Character introductions
"Introduce ALL the other characters as soon as possible. Bring them on in action."Okay. I agree with the actual suggestion here, but not necessarily the timing. A long story deals in the characters over time, but having most of the principles introduced in the first quarter of the story is important. This includes the Big Bad - the "Foozle" as Scorpia used to call him. While he may not necessarily need a full-on on-screen introduction, but his presence should be noted.
Persona 3 (which unfortunately overdid the non-interactive or limited interaction sequences at the beginning of the game) handled this pretty well. By the time you get into your first fight, the player has been introduced to the protagonist; future team-mates Yukari Takeba (who appears ready to pull a gun on the protagonist when they first meet - though appearances can be deceiving), Mitsuru Kurijo, and Akihiko Sanada; the "chairman" Shuji Ikutsuki; and the mysterious boy with the annoying voice Pharos - who has two other incarnations throughout the game.
Physical Conflict
"Hero's endeavors land him in an actual physical conflict near the end of the first 1500 words."Time for some combat. Or not. The point here is physical conflict... some action. It could be a chase scene, too. Or something action-y, even for a non-action medium like most adventure games. Something exciting.
In my opinion, the take-away here for computer games would be to kill the exposition early on and get to some good interactive action! Especially with fantasy and science-fiction RPGs, there's a tendency to ramble on and on with exposition in the early stages of the game. This comes with attempting to introduce the hero and plot in an unfamiliar world.
But while the exposition is necessary, it doesn't need to be in the form of a front-loaded data-dump. Star Wars opened with a battle with no explanation of who the good guys or bad guys were - the audience picked it up as they went along. Ditto with The Matrix - I had no clue what was going on in that opening Trinity sequence, but I loved what I saw and I was ready to learn more when Trinity made her escape through the telephone. Likewise, I was happy to run along battling guards and robots in Final Fantasy VII and only learn between quick fights who I was and why I was doing it.
A Plot Twist or Reversal
"Near the end of first 1500 words, there is a complete surprise twist in the plot development."Should a 20+ hour story in a videogame have a plot twist this early into things?
I don't know. I will say that as a player, little surprises throughout the game that shake my expectations can help me retain interest. It doesn't always need to be some big M. Night Shyamalan shock like discovering what really happened to Darth Revan. But Dent provides a great example about the hero trying to rescue somebody named Eloise who can explain the secret behind the sinister events... only to find out that Eloise is a ring-tailed monkey.
This sounds much more satisfying and interesting twist than, "But our princess is in another castle!"
So - a twist in the first ten minutes? It might be early, but it may not always be too early... I'd suggest some good surprise or twist before the first hour mark is highly recommended. Hey - I was totally not expecting what happened to Rhen in Aveyond right after she rescued the princess... but that surprise was probably what hooked me on the game.
The First Few Minutes Checklist
"SO FAR: Does it have SUSPENSE?I think Dent's questions here are appropriate as-is in any game story in the first ten (or at least twenty) minutes. Interestingly, the first question applies to the player - is there a mystery to intrigue or at least interest him or her? The second question applies to the player's character - are they in some kind of personal danger - from a life-threatening pursuit to the danger of being sent to military school? And the third question is simply checking the integrity of the plot.
Is there a MENACE to the hero?
Does everything happen logically?"
So what's your take so far? Can you think of other examples or applications? Is this even an interesting exercise? Does it make you look at any of your favorite games differently?
Labels: Game Design
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 6:10 AM (Permalink)
Comments:
1) The most graphically advanced RPG with the most detailed townspeople that was available before CT was FF6. Pretty much all other RPGs of the time had 1-dimensional NPCs with nothing interesting to say ever. "Welcome to [town name here]!" was standard dialogue. The Fair was a HUGE step towards having interesting NPCs be a standard.
uh thats some serious crack your smoking. CT came out in 1995.. not exactly EARLY to the party. So much better stuff came out before it. FF6 as the 'most graphically advanced RPG' was nothing but same old same old SNES stuff. CT is nothing but same old same old SNES stuff.
Neither FF6 or CT set the world on fire for graphics or NPC interaction. Ultima 7 (1992) absolutely destroys it 3 years earlier. heck even Ultima 6 is imo FAR FAR superior that FF6 or CT and U6 came out in 1990, 5 years before CT and 4 years before FF6. Magic Candle from 1989 has better NPC's, now were predating CT by 6 years.
Links to this post:
<< Home
it's totally right: the first minutes are VERY important.
this reminds me about Chrono Trigger: I tried playing it, but it began with kids wandering around pointlessly in a fair or something like that... I really didn't care in the slightest, and I quit after a really short time.
this reminds me about Chrono Trigger: I tried playing it, but it began with kids wandering around pointlessly in a fair or something like that... I really didn't care in the slightest, and I quit after a really short time.
One difference between games and novels is that in CRPGs, while having a big background story with some universal threat is nice, I enjoy the freedom to completely ignore it. I don't like to be forcefully confronted to it. My characters are always deliberately candid about big matters, and enjoy hunting basement rats instead. Especially when they sense the big matters will be pathetically cheesy, and involve them through some unescapable destiny idiocy of sorts. One typical exemple is Morrowind, that I appreciated for the freedom of disregarding the main quest. In Fallout, the main quest related time limit annoyed me a bit. Semi-linear CRPGS that proudly shove the big matters down my throat right at the beginning bore me. Of course, I'd be a terrible tabletop RPG player.
That said :
1) Still, I do like a big matter to be going on somewhere, as it gives a potential "end" to the game. When I had enough of these subquests, I like to know there's a limit somewhere - one quest that brings up end titles. It also helps feeling the universe isn't intemporal : even if the main quest events are freezed by my refusal to trigger them, it puts the universe in some kind of historical perspective.
2) I grew up to also like, to some extend, fictions where the protagonists don't care about the main story either, either being reluctant to play a role in it (or even being sarcastic about it), being completely oblivious of the magnitide of what happens around them (even if it happens because of them), or ending up disgruntled at some point and giving up on the plot (one french popular classic by Albert Simonin ends up without a proper closure, because the main character is just fed up and retires, and that's delicious). I like Han Solo's character because he doesn't feel too concerned with the whole empire vs rebellion thing, and I would have loved the prequels to be about his low-scale smuggling adventures, with just hints of the political evolutions in the background. I also like that aspect in Coen movies. Or in some Queneau or Camus novels. But as a c-roleplayer, I care for that libery of disinvestment even more.
That said :
1) Still, I do like a big matter to be going on somewhere, as it gives a potential "end" to the game. When I had enough of these subquests, I like to know there's a limit somewhere - one quest that brings up end titles. It also helps feeling the universe isn't intemporal : even if the main quest events are freezed by my refusal to trigger them, it puts the universe in some kind of historical perspective.
2) I grew up to also like, to some extend, fictions where the protagonists don't care about the main story either, either being reluctant to play a role in it (or even being sarcastic about it), being completely oblivious of the magnitide of what happens around them (even if it happens because of them), or ending up disgruntled at some point and giving up on the plot (one french popular classic by Albert Simonin ends up without a proper closure, because the main character is just fed up and retires, and that's delicious). I like Han Solo's character because he doesn't feel too concerned with the whole empire vs rebellion thing, and I would have loved the prequels to be about his low-scale smuggling adventures, with just hints of the political evolutions in the background. I also like that aspect in Coen movies. Or in some Queneau or Camus novels. But as a c-roleplayer, I care for that libery of disinvestment even more.
# posted by 
: February 04, 2010 2:12 PM
: February 04, 2010 2:12 PM
Heh! I usually spend the first hour or so with an RPG reading the manual and/or creating my character(s). Sometimes, my anticipation is so high that I almost want to put off starting the game. Weird, I know.
Yes, I thought about Morrowind, too. At the start, you don't have a clue that some main quest line even exists. For that matter, I never followed it long enough to find out what it was. Heh, heh. But I loved the game.
The starting village was small enough that even talking to everyone didn't take much time. (That's critical, since even I'd get bored chatting with NPCs for hours, before seeing any action at all.) And when you walk out of that little village, it's as if the whole world is ahead of you, with the freedom to go anywhere and do anything you want. Loved it!
I'm also crazy about Mount&Blade - despite my laughable ineptness with the combat - but it violates just about every precept you mention. I know you're not talking about designing games to a set formula, but still,... all I can think about are examples to the contrary.
And yeah, I LIKE the trite - or tried-and-true - beginning of the amnesiac hero (was there ever a better start to a game than Planescape: Torment), as well as fighting rats as a low-level character (vicious, disease-carrying, disgusting little critters - what could be better than that?).
Yes, I thought about Morrowind, too. At the start, you don't have a clue that some main quest line even exists. For that matter, I never followed it long enough to find out what it was. Heh, heh. But I loved the game.
The starting village was small enough that even talking to everyone didn't take much time. (That's critical, since even I'd get bored chatting with NPCs for hours, before seeing any action at all.) And when you walk out of that little village, it's as if the whole world is ahead of you, with the freedom to go anywhere and do anything you want. Loved it!
I'm also crazy about Mount&Blade - despite my laughable ineptness with the combat - but it violates just about every precept you mention. I know you're not talking about designing games to a set formula, but still,... all I can think about are examples to the contrary.
And yeah, I LIKE the trite - or tried-and-true - beginning of the amnesiac hero (was there ever a better start to a game than Planescape: Torment), as well as fighting rats as a low-level character (vicious, disease-carrying, disgusting little critters - what could be better than that?).
"this reminds me about Chrono Trigger: I tried playing it, but it began with kids wandering around pointlessly in a fair or something like that... I really didn't care in the slightest, and I quit after a really short time."
Uh, dude, that's like saying "This reminds me about Half Life 2" I tried playing it, but it began with pointless wandering around a train station or something like that..."
Chrono Trigger is a GOOD example of the principles of pulp fiction applied to game plots. The wandering around the fair part introduces you almost half of the party (way faster than Mass Effect does), and leads directly to the first major plot twist that sets off a series of events with repercussions in the future and past (thanks to time travel) with direct impact on the heroes' lives.
To understand the fair area in Chrono Trigger, you need to realize
1) The most graphically advanced RPG with the most detailed townspeople that was available before CT was FF6. Pretty much all other RPGs of the time had 1-dimensional NPCs with nothing interesting to say ever. "Welcome to [town name here]!" was standard dialogue. The Fair was a HUGE step towards having interesting NPCs be a standard.
2) A huge chunk of A.D. 1000 is available to explore right away. You can stay at the fair and jump into the plot right away if you want, but the initial impact of traveling to [minor spoiler censored] is much better if you've taken your time to explore A.D. 1000 first to see what the differences are. It's nice to have the starting area be completely off any kind of rails for once.
3) Gato is an awesome trainer for those who haven't played RPGs before.
4) Several characters at the fair are foreshadowing events and characters that have an impact on the plot later.
5) A bunch of the things you can do at the fair impact a subplot later in the game. In fact, it's one of the first ever Fable-like saint/jerk tests ever, it just doesn't tell you until later. It gives a sense that all of your actions, whether you're explicitly trying to alter the past or not, have consequences. (This isn't quite true, but there's still an amazing number of ways you can choose to do things differently on different play-throughs.)
Uh, dude, that's like saying "This reminds me about Half Life 2" I tried playing it, but it began with pointless wandering around a train station or something like that..."
Chrono Trigger is a GOOD example of the principles of pulp fiction applied to game plots. The wandering around the fair part introduces you almost half of the party (way faster than Mass Effect does), and leads directly to the first major plot twist that sets off a series of events with repercussions in the future and past (thanks to time travel) with direct impact on the heroes' lives.
To understand the fair area in Chrono Trigger, you need to realize
1) The most graphically advanced RPG with the most detailed townspeople that was available before CT was FF6. Pretty much all other RPGs of the time had 1-dimensional NPCs with nothing interesting to say ever. "Welcome to [town name here]!" was standard dialogue. The Fair was a HUGE step towards having interesting NPCs be a standard.
2) A huge chunk of A.D. 1000 is available to explore right away. You can stay at the fair and jump into the plot right away if you want, but the initial impact of traveling to [minor spoiler censored] is much better if you've taken your time to explore A.D. 1000 first to see what the differences are. It's nice to have the starting area be completely off any kind of rails for once.
3) Gato is an awesome trainer for those who haven't played RPGs before.
4) Several characters at the fair are foreshadowing events and characters that have an impact on the plot later.
5) A bunch of the things you can do at the fair impact a subplot later in the game. In fact, it's one of the first ever Fable-like saint/jerk tests ever, it just doesn't tell you until later. It gives a sense that all of your actions, whether you're explicitly trying to alter the past or not, have consequences. (This isn't quite true, but there's still an amazing number of ways you can choose to do things differently on different play-throughs.)
I'm a long time reader, first time commenter, so um, hello.
Anyway, I had a couple thoughts while reading your post.
1) It might just be because I have Mass Effect 2 on my mind at the moment, but I think Bioware's games tend to follow this template: They start with a mostly linear part (the initial dungeon in BG2, Taris in KOTOR, Eden Prime in ME1, the origin story + Grey Warden initiation in Dragon Age) in which you're introduced to the big bad of the game, one or more of the principal party members, and at the end of which there is some kind of plot twist or reversal of the party's fortunes.
I think you could argue that the less effective Bioware plots have problems to some extent because they fail to hit some of these points. The twist in Neverwinter Nights happens later then it probably should, and the twist in Mass Effect is kinda lame since it's only effective if you have a better understanding of the backstory.
So, as a method of hooking the player, this seems like a pretty effective formula.
2) The big issue I see is that in games that introduce a big Looming Threat right off the bat end up making me feel like I'm shirking my duties by taking sidequests. This ends up doing the exact opposite of what's intended, making the fiction feel less believable. For example, Mass Effect, where I wandered around scanning planets for collectibles while the galaxy was facing imminent invasion.
So, the rest of the game needs to fit the opening. This kind of intro is fine for more linear games. But, as the commenters above have pointed out, games with more open worlds that the player explores at their leisure (like Morrowind or Fallout 3) might be better suited by just dropping the player in with no immediate goal.
Or maybe there's a middle ground. Like how the old James Bond movies would begin with an introductory action sequence that was completely unconnected to the main plot.
Anyway, I had a couple thoughts while reading your post.
1) It might just be because I have Mass Effect 2 on my mind at the moment, but I think Bioware's games tend to follow this template: They start with a mostly linear part (the initial dungeon in BG2, Taris in KOTOR, Eden Prime in ME1, the origin story + Grey Warden initiation in Dragon Age) in which you're introduced to the big bad of the game, one or more of the principal party members, and at the end of which there is some kind of plot twist or reversal of the party's fortunes.
I think you could argue that the less effective Bioware plots have problems to some extent because they fail to hit some of these points. The twist in Neverwinter Nights happens later then it probably should, and the twist in Mass Effect is kinda lame since it's only effective if you have a better understanding of the backstory.
So, as a method of hooking the player, this seems like a pretty effective formula.
2) The big issue I see is that in games that introduce a big Looming Threat right off the bat end up making me feel like I'm shirking my duties by taking sidequests. This ends up doing the exact opposite of what's intended, making the fiction feel less believable. For example, Mass Effect, where I wandered around scanning planets for collectibles while the galaxy was facing imminent invasion.
So, the rest of the game needs to fit the opening. This kind of intro is fine for more linear games. But, as the commenters above have pointed out, games with more open worlds that the player explores at their leisure (like Morrowind or Fallout 3) might be better suited by just dropping the player in with no immediate goal.
Or maybe there's a middle ground. Like how the old James Bond movies would begin with an introductory action sequence that was completely unconnected to the main plot.
# posted by : February 05, 2010 1:23 PM
: February 05, 2010 1:23 PM
Oh, funnily enough I was also thinking of James Bond, for the exact same issue. Through another angle. This is what I hadn't posted :
One other difference is that CRPGs focus on the character's evolution. The hero starts the story powerless. It's a bit artificial to ask a 4hp 1xp infant to go solve that problem of undead armies, raising gods and collapsing suns - while asking him to first go train on basement rats to that effect. On the opposite, pulp novels usually start with a super-trained super-experienced adult adventurer of sorts, and it's a bit awkward to see him face no or tiny-scale issues. As a kid, I was a bit perplexed by those more mature Bond novels or short stories where "nothing happens" : the guy who had saved London from nuclear holocaust, foiled some worldwide blackmail, and prevented mass sarin poisoning (not to mention systematically saving the planet in the movies) was suddely pit against petty diamond smugglers, abusive hotel customers, or just talkative contacts. It took me time to grow to prefer the purely mundane first half of "You only live twice".
All this to say that while it makes sense to quickly throw a DocSavage-level adventurer face to huge threats, most CRPGs start at a point of relative harmlessness of the protagonist. A veteran Jedi master may enthousiastically run to overthrow the Empire right away. An orphan peasant will normally push these matters aside and repair robots instead. At that point, the narrator's insistance would be as out-of-place and irritating for him as, say, news of the imminent WW2 for Philip Marlowe.
Anyway, my point was what Peachfuzz says.
One other difference is that CRPGs focus on the character's evolution. The hero starts the story powerless. It's a bit artificial to ask a 4hp 1xp infant to go solve that problem of undead armies, raising gods and collapsing suns - while asking him to first go train on basement rats to that effect. On the opposite, pulp novels usually start with a super-trained super-experienced adult adventurer of sorts, and it's a bit awkward to see him face no or tiny-scale issues. As a kid, I was a bit perplexed by those more mature Bond novels or short stories where "nothing happens" : the guy who had saved London from nuclear holocaust, foiled some worldwide blackmail, and prevented mass sarin poisoning (not to mention systematically saving the planet in the movies) was suddely pit against petty diamond smugglers, abusive hotel customers, or just talkative contacts. It took me time to grow to prefer the purely mundane first half of "You only live twice".
All this to say that while it makes sense to quickly throw a DocSavage-level adventurer face to huge threats, most CRPGs start at a point of relative harmlessness of the protagonist. A veteran Jedi master may enthousiastically run to overthrow the Empire right away. An orphan peasant will normally push these matters aside and repair robots instead. At that point, the narrator's insistance would be as out-of-place and irritating for him as, say, news of the imminent WW2 for Philip Marlowe.
Anyway, my point was what Peachfuzz says.
# posted by : February 05, 2010 2:30 PM
: February 05, 2010 2:30 PM1) The most graphically advanced RPG with the most detailed townspeople that was available before CT was FF6. Pretty much all other RPGs of the time had 1-dimensional NPCs with nothing interesting to say ever. "Welcome to [town name here]!" was standard dialogue. The Fair was a HUGE step towards having interesting NPCs be a standard.
uh thats some serious crack your smoking. CT came out in 1995.. not exactly EARLY to the party. So much better stuff came out before it. FF6 as the 'most graphically advanced RPG' was nothing but same old same old SNES stuff. CT is nothing but same old same old SNES stuff.
Neither FF6 or CT set the world on fire for graphics or NPC interaction. Ultima 7 (1992) absolutely destroys it 3 years earlier. heck even Ultima 6 is imo FAR FAR superior that FF6 or CT and U6 came out in 1990, 5 years before CT and 4 years before FF6. Magic Candle from 1989 has better NPC's, now were predating CT by 6 years.
Well, the formula is helping me think of amusing ideas for a project I probably shouldn't be doing, but as the ideas involve Plot Twists, I can't tell you! :)
The one big problem with a plot twist in the first 10 minutes is that every reviewer feels obligated to give it away, because, hey, it's in the first 10 minutes so it's not like they're giving anything away.
That having been said, I agree that you need to hook the player from the start. But it's just as important to keep hooking your player so they don't get bored. Design for a game climax every 15 minutes of some sort, either via level design, or via achievements, or via anything to give the player feedback that they're making progress. Otherwise, they may get bored and play something else, and when it comes time for episode 2 to come out, they'll only remember how they still haven't finished the first one..
Post a Comment
That having been said, I agree that you need to hook the player from the start. But it's just as important to keep hooking your player so they don't get bored. Design for a game climax every 15 minutes of some sort, either via level design, or via achievements, or via anything to give the player feedback that they're making progress. Otherwise, they may get bored and play something else, and when it comes time for episode 2 to come out, they'll only remember how they still haven't finished the first one..
Links to this post:
<< Home
