Storytelling in Single Player
Action Computer Games
The tools of the trade
WILHELM
ÖSTERBERG
Master of Science Thesis
Stockholm, Sweden 2007
Storytelling in Single Player
Action Computer Games
The tools of the trade
WILHELM
ÖSTERBERG
Master’s Thesis in Human Computer Interaction (20 credits)
at the School of Media Technology
Royal Institute of Technology year 2007
Supervisor at CSC was Björn Thuresson
Examiner was Yngve Sundblad
TRITA-CSC-E 2007:001
ISRN-KTH/CSC/E--07/001--SE
ISSN-1653-5715
Royal Institute of Technology
School of Computer Science and Communication
KTH CSC
SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
URL: www.csc.kth.se
Abstract
Storytelling in Single Player Action Computer Games –
The Tools of the Trade
Stories have been told in computer games for as long as the games medium has existed. Their
quality has in most cases been poor, and the modes of storytelling used have been haphazard at
best; the story often even interfering with the gameplay experience. This has begun to change in
recent years, with new technology rapidly expanding the possibilities of the games medium and
computer games reaching the mass-market and high profitability. Game development being a young
craft and game storytelling even younger, there are still no acknowledged methods or systems for
storytelling in games however.
This Master Thesis examines the storytelling of games in the single player action genre by
looking at four representatives of the genre: Just Cause, Gun, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas and
Fable. First, eleven tools used for conveying story in games are identified and explained. These form
the toolbox available for constructing the story part of a game. Secondly, the four benefits of having
stories in games are defined, with the further discussion focusing on three of them: cohesiveness,
motivation and immersion. Lastly, combined use of the tools for maximising the positive effects of
story in the action genre is discussed and some practical suggestions are made.
These results are a first step towards a methodology for telling stories in computer games.
Defining the objectives of stories in games is important for bringing an awareness of what the
purpose of a game’s story component is. Lining up the tools available tells us how we can reach
these objectives. This knowledge can act as a foundation for taking the craft of storytelling in games
further in the future, bringing it from an intrinsic craft to a more conscious working methodology.
Sammanfattning
Berättande i actionspel – verktygen som används
Lika länge som datorspel har existerat har också berättande funnits i dem. Kvaliteten på
berättandet har dock i de flesta fall varit låg och någon egentlig metod för hur det ska göras har
inte funnits. I värsta fall har berättandet i spelen till och med stört själva spelandet. Under senare
år har det här börjat förändras, framför allt tack vare att bättre datorer och spelens penetration
på massmarknaden har gett helt nya tekniska och ekonomiska förutsättningar. Eftersom datorspelsskapande (och särskilt berättande i datorspel) är ett ungt hantverk finns dock inga vedertagna
metoder för berättande i spel.
I detta examensarbete undersöks berättande i genren actionspel för en spelare genom att fyra
representanter för genren har tittats på: Just Cause, Gun, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas och
Fable. För det första identifieras och förklaras elva verktyg för berättande i spel. Tillsammans
utgör de den verktygslåda som finns tillgänglig för skapandet av berättelser i datorspelsmediet.
För det andra definieras de fyra anledningarna att ha berättelser i spel. Av dessa diskuteras
sedan tre stycken vidare; jag kallar dem sammanhang [cohesiveness], motivation och immersion.
Slutligen diskuteras hur verktygen kan användas tillsammans i den aktuella genren för att maximera
fördelarna som tagits upp. Avslutningsvis förs också några förslag på praktiskt tillvägagångssätt
fram.
Resultatet av den här studien är ett första steg mot en metodik för att forma berättande i
spel. Att definiera fördelarna med att ha berättelser i spel är mycket viktigt för att skapa en
medvetenhet kring vad själva syftet med berättelsekomponenten i spel är. Att sedan rada upp och
definiera verktygen som finns tillgängliga visar hur man kan nå detta syfte. Den här kunskapen
kan fungera som en grund att stå på för att i framtiden ge det numera svårdefinierade arbetet med
berättande i spel ett mer medvetet arbetssätt.
Contents
Contents
List of Figures
1 Introduction
1.1 Task Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.1 A Note on the Evolution of Games
1.2 Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3 Choice of Research Subject . . . . . . . .
1.4 The Structure of this Thesis . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1
2
2
3
5
2 Background
2.1 Human-Computer Interaction . . . . . .
2.1.1 HCI and Computer Games . . .
2.2 Interactivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3 Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4 Immersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.5 Gameplay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.6 Storytelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.6.1 Storytelling in Computer Games
2.6.2 A Note on the Interactive Nature
2.7 Narratology Versus Ludology . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
of Storytelling
. . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
6
8
9
10
10
12
12
13
15
16
3 Method
3.1 Analysing Games . . . . . .
3.2 Playing the Games . . . . .
3.3 Literature Studies . . . . .
3.4 Interviews with Developers
3.4.1 Interview Questions
3.5 Method Critique . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
18
21
22
22
23
23
4 Results
4.1 The Benefits of Storytelling in Games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2 Fable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25
25
28
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
29
30
30
32
33
33
35
36
5 Analysis
5.1 The Eleven Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.1 Pre-Rendered Video . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.2 In-Game Cutscenes . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.3 Scripted Sequences . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.4 Voice-over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.5 Ambient Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.6 Character Development . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.7 Location Evolvement . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.8 Interactive Dialogue . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.9 Storytelling Items . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.10 Player Journal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.11 Plain Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2 Using the Tools Together . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2.1 Tying Story to Gameplay . . . . . . . . .
5.3 Implementing Story in the Action-Arcade Genre
5.4 Conclusions and Future Work . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
40
40
41
41
42
42
42
43
44
44
45
45
45
46
47
50
51
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.2.1 Fable’s Story . . . . . . . . . . . .
GTA: San Andreas . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.3.1 GTA: San Andreas’ Story . . . . .
Gun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4.1 Gun’s Story . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Just Cause . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.5.1 Just Cause’s Story . . . . . . . . .
The Telling of Story in the Games Played
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Bibliography
53
Appendices
55
A Ludography
56
B Glossary
57
List of Figures
2.1
The cross-disciplinarity of HCI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
Screenshot
Screenshot
Screenshot
Screenshot
.
.
.
.
28
31
32
34
5.1
5.2
The strengths of the storytelling tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The tools’ suitability for tying story to gameplay . . . . . . . . . . . . .
48
49
from
from
from
from
Fable . . . . . . . . . .
Grand Theft Auto: San
Gun . . . . . . . . . . .
Just Cause . . . . . . .
. . . . .
Andreas
. . . . .
. . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
Chapter 1
Introduction
“Ah! Sweet freedom!” José Caramicas, San Esperito
As a play tester of Just Cause, I was faced with an enormous world full of
freedom to act. Run or swim for hours, drive a huge number of vehicles or wreak
mindless destruction on the island republic of San Esperito. However, all these
actions did not have much to tie them together. There were story missions, yes,
but most of the play time was spent on roaming free on missions of my own design.
The questions arose: Can nothing be done to make all these actions play a part in
the greater whole? Wouldn’t it be great if my two hours of hunting down corrupt
soldiers had an impact on the story and the next mission?
There are a great many games that have taken the story-part one or many steps
further, especially in the RPG genre. It has to be noted, though, that Just Cause
and games like Just Cause are action games – the player doesn’t expect and doesn’t
want a massive plot with branching storylines, dramatic choices galore and cherries
on top. As it is now, the story is there just because that is what the player expects:
A minor component that doesn’t interfere with the action-packed gameplay too
much. So what’s the problem? It is that this is far too obvious. The action genre
has a tradition of detached stories that are there just because “the game must have
a story”. This perspective can be represented by a quote from the almost legendary
game programmer and designer John Carmack:
Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie. It’s expected to be there,
but it’s not that important.
Rather than being satisfied with this quite sad attitude towards storytelling in
games, I would like to ask: Now that we have a story, how can we use it for actually
enhancing the gameplay experience?
1.1
Task Definition
Two opposing groups have been identified in the research on games as storytelling
media: the Ludologists, who want to see the focus shift onto the mechanics of
1
game play, and the Narratologists, who are interested in studying games alongside
other storytelling media.1 [18] This debate seems to focus on computer games as
one homogeneous group and whole games being narratives or not. I represent
another point of view, choosing not to side with any of the two mentioned groups,
but instead claiming their argument irrelevant. (As we will see, most researchers
seem to claim this middle ground, leading to the questioning of the very existence
of this debate.[11]) Trying to define fundamental truths on narrative in interactive
entertainment (as has been done with some success in traditional storytelling media)
is pointless and futile, as the games medium is infinitely more heterogeneous than
cinema or literature. The difference in dramaturgy between an action flick and high
drama can be seen as mere nuances, while the dramaturgy employed in an RPG
and a puzzle game must be fundamentally different by the nature of their respective
genres.
One example of the nonsense that emerges when the holistic approach is employed is Jesper Juul’s article “Games telling stories?”. Juul’s argument is based
on the assumption that games can be handled as one homogeneous group, using
examples like Tetris to prove his points on the discrepancies between cinema and
computer games as narrative media.[21]
Each serious attempt at defining or discussing narrative in games has to be done
with respect to genre differences. This thesis discusses the Singleplayer Storydriven
Action Games genre. Well-known games in this genre are the Grand Theft Auto
series and Halo.
1.1.1
A Note on the Evolution of Games
Not only the genre must be taken into consideration when discussing narrative
in games. A somewhat obvious factor is when the game was made. Using older
games in discussions on narrative in games is not at all advisable, perhaps with
the exception of orientational sections on the evolution of games. Analysing old
games for any other purpose is less than advisable in a medium evolving as fast as
computer games. For example, using a game like Missile Command (released 1981),
as Juul does[21], to prove anything in this field is as silly as using slapstick movies
from the twenties to fuel arguments of the impossibility of dialogue in cinema.
The rapid development of games in the last few years have given developers
new tools in incorporating a story into their games. Older games, on the other
hand, were forced to rely on the player-created stories, i.e. from the developer’s
perspective no stories at all. More on this in chapter 2.
1.2
Thesis
Stories can be said to have been told in computer games since the first round
of Tennis for Two was played on an oscilloscope in the fifties. The question of
1
More on this can be found in chapter 2.
2
computer games as a storytelling medium on the other hand has evolved over the
last few years. As we have seen, there is even still some controversy as to computer
games even being a storytelling medium. If games are narratives per se or not is
more a question of word definitions than anything else and is outside the scope of
this thesis.
Regardless of games being narratives or not, I believe we can all agree that
stories are told in the context of computer games.2 (Thankfully, the stories are
getting better too!)
When working with storytelling in games, two separate areas can be identified.
First, the storytelling in itself: the written story and the way it is told, different
areas being plot, characters, dramaturgy and so on. This part could be retold as,
or transformed into, a written story or a film. The second area is the story’s ties
to gameplay and player actions. This includes the techniques and methods used to
tell the story and to forge story and gameplay together into one media experience.
A simple and common way of doing this is to begin with a cutscene telling the
player what to do, followed by a play session (with the player performing some
sort of mission or task related to the story conveyed in the cutscenes) with another
cutscene displayed as a reward upon the successful completion of the mission or
task. This is then repeated a number of times until the game is completed.
When trying to create a game, both these areas are equally important. Failure
to tell the story in the “right” way naturally makes it unsuccessful, just as in any
movie. On the other hand, telling the story using all the finesse available still
amounts to nothing if you do not manage to relate it to the actual gameplay. This
is by nature an issue that emerges only in interactive media, i.e. games.
This thesis focuses on the second area discussed above: How to tie the story to
the actual gameplay. Specifically, I am looking at what techniques or methods are
used to convey story in games and how to tie story to gameplay in the sub genre
singleplayer free roaming action games. I do this through three steps:
1. Define in what ways the story can contribute to a game in the current genre
2. Identify the methods or tools that are used to tell stories in games
3. Investigate in what ways these methods or tools can be used to forge story
and gameplay together and to maximise the positive effects found in (1).
1.3
Choice of Research Subject
As each genre has its own demands on the story component, each genre needs to
utilise a set of techniques specific to that genre when tying story and gameplay
together. There may also be some techniques that are more of a general character
2
When discussing stories told, I refer not only to stories created by the game developers and
told during the playing of the game, but also the stories emerging from the gameplay itself (as in
Tennis for Two). This distinction is discussed further in chapter 2.
3
and not specifically tied to a given genre. In this thesis, I am investigating the
implementation of story in four different games: Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas,
Gun, Fable and Just Cause, each studied for a specific reason.
There are many singleplayer story driven action games, but when looking at
games including a storyline combined with a strong or dominant portion of freeroaming gameplay, the field narrows considerably, with the GTA series and Just
Cause emerging as interesting representatives of the genre. Several RPGs have a
similar structure, but with one important difference: The story plays a much larger
part in the gaming experience. This calls for another approach when tying story to
gameplay, one that allows the story to interfere with the action more. (One sign of
this lower pace in RPGs is that they often have turn-based or round-based combat.)
Just Cause serves as the obvious basis for discussion, as the purpose of this thesis
is to improve the story’s ties to gameplay and to maximise the positive effects of
story in games like Just Cause.
With the difference between genres being imperative in this area, I believe that
GTA: San Andreas is a very interesting research subject, even though there are other
games more renown for their story implementations. It is also suitable as it is highly
recommended and praised by game critics and seen as one of the best games in the
genre by the players. (The PS2 version receiving an average score of 9.5 out of 10 in
152 different game magazines/sites.[13]) Showing a successful combination between
a strong story and sandbox gameplay makes the game especially interesting.
I have also played the famous single player action RPG Fable designed by Peter
Molyneux (lauded as one of the world’s most brilliant and inventive game developers), mainly to look at its strong character development component. Fable also
employs an unusually large number of storytelling tools3 which makes it especially
interesting when looking at the usage of, and strengths and weaknesses of, the tools.
Finally, Gun has been investigated, mainly for its cinema-like storytelling. Even
though it belongs to the same genre as Just Cause, its free roaming component is
very much in the background, with a highly linear gameplay closely tied to the story
dominating most of the game. This use of another style of storytelling makes Gun
an important complement to the other games played.
All four games being fairly recent is of course also a plus as we have noted that
there is not much point in looking at old games and old problems that have already
been solved or bypassed.
This work has been done at Avalanche Studios, with the gracious support of its
employees and owners. Avalanche Studios is with 65 employees Sweden’s second
largest game studio, located at Medborgarplatsen in central Stockholm. Founded
by Linus Blomberg and Christoffer Sundberg in 2003, the studio has now finished
its first game, the multi-platform title Just Cause.
3
See chapter four for a list of the storytelling tools found in computer games
4
1.4
The Structure of this Thesis
This thesis is organised into six chapters of which this introductory chapter is the
first. There is much weight on the Background chapter, as much of the analysis is
based on existing research on the subject. This previous research covered in Chapter
two works as a deeper introduction to the specific area investigated and outlines the
concepts important for the understanding of the following chapters. Chapter three
describes and discusses game analysis and the method used. Findings from the
investigation of four critically acclaimed, and more or less commercially successful,
games can be found in chapter four. Here, each game and its story is presented
in a section of its own, with explanations of important features and considerations
relevant for the analysis. The results from the first two tasks are also covered
in chapter four, laying the foundation for handling the third task in chapter five,
where the background knowledge and the findings from the games played are forged
together in a discussion about the main question posed above. Ending this chapter
is a summary and the conclusions of the entire work, together with suggestions for
future research.
In an area developing as fast as computer games, new words and concepts spring
up all the time. Also, existing words are constantly re-used in new ways and get
new meanings. Therefore there is a small glossary in the appendix, explaining words
and acronyms (like RPG and NPC) that are used in the text. Please note that the
meanings I assign to them might not be the only correct ones, but are sometimes
rather defining the way I am using the words here.
A last note: Throughout the text I have chosen to refer to the player as “he”
instead of “he or she” for readability purposes.
5
Chapter 2
Background
I have found that the available literature on the subject of this thesis is expanding
rapidly to say the least. When reading up on it though, it becomes obvious that
there really isn’t much common ground to stand on so far. Almost every article
has a perspective of its own, with academics and industry representatives forming
two loose groups with completely different approaches. The academics struggle to
make science of this emerging field, preferably a science as exact as possible. This
creates very narrow papers focusing on specific aspects of storytelling, so far mainly
devoted to definitions and distinctions. Those writing from the business perspective
naturally do not see it as a new field, but rather a craft they have developed and
refined during a course of years. This leads to a more hands-on approach with
many how-to tips. However, it is evident that there is an empty space where the
theoretical backing should have been. This is where the academic research can
contribute in a big way.1
In this chapter I have focused on describing some concepts crucial for the use
and understanding of storytelling in computer games. I have not included a section
on the history and rapid growth of the games industry and so forth, as I presume
this is more than familiar to the reader already.
2.1
Human-Computer Interaction
This work being done in the field of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), it might
be appropriate to start off with a section on exactly that:
Human-computer interaction is the study of the relationships which exist between human users and the computer systems they use in the
performance of their various tasks.[10]
HCI is a cross-disciplinary science field, lending knowledge from such diverse
areas as cognitive psychology, computer science, design and several others. (See
1
To get any respect from the developers, game researchers might just have to start actually
playing games though...
6
figure 2.1) This, and the current pace of technical progress, makes it develop rapidly
and change constantly, as it must adjust to new findings in all of the fields it is
dependent upon.
Figure 2.1. The cross-disciplinarity of HCI. Note that all of these fields also can be
considered relevant for computer games production
The purpose of HCI is to help people using computers to perform various tasks,
facilitating these tasks as much as possible. Good software makes people actually
use the software, as it makes their tasks easier. This seems quite obvious, but
there are far too many examples of software that even makes a task more difficult
or tedious than it was when performed manually.[10] The interface is even more
crucial in an entertainment product than in other applications, as there is no task
to be done, no work to be made, no salary paid out: the sole motivation of using
the software is the fun it delivers.
When looking at HCI in the context of computer games design, the term immersion comes into focus. A well-designed interface for interaction in a game is
imperative if you do not want to disturb the feeling of immersion and thereby the
gameplay experience. A common goal interpretation for interface design is that “[i]f
the human-computer system is properly built, the user will actually ignore it and
will not notice that it is there. The very best systems and the very best interfaces
will be overlooked entirely by the user”.[10] In the quest for immersion, this is more
true than ever.
7
2.1.1
HCI and Computer Games
HCI and computer games development have existed for several decades and have
both had a remarkable growth and development during this time. Despite the two
fields sharing an important goal in the dedication to providing the users with what
they want, there have been very little interaction between them.[19] In the last few
years, this has begun to change, with some work being made on the relationship
between HCI and games (or the bringing of insights and knowledge from one field
to the other). One such example is the work carried out by a play test group established by Microsoft. There is still a long way to go however, as that study points
out: ”This relationship between theories of game design and traditional HCI evaluation methods has yet to be defined but definitely yields an exiting future.”[9] They
(Pagulayan et al.) further point out nine important differences between productive
applications (the traditional objects of HCI) and games that have to be recognised
and understood if HCI methods and theories are to be used in games.
While a large part of HCI concerns the maximising of usability through usercentered design, testing, cognition, ergonomics and more, this thesis concerns the
not so easily defined task of creating fun. One of the nine important differences
between games and applications is exactly this; an application is used to arrive at
a result, while in the game there is no external goal. Instead, the process is the
important part, and the object of the process is having fun. In Pagulayan’s words:
Thus, the goal of both design and usability when applied to games is
creating a pleasurable process. This fundamental difference leads us
to devote more of our effort to collecting user evaluation of games (as
opposed to strictly performance) than we would if we were working
on productivity applications, where more of our work would measure
accomplishing tasks (or productivity).
So, the usability of a game can be seen as a gatekeeper of fun: If we do not get
past these issues we never get to where the fun is.[9] This leads to an important
point: that the usability approach of HCI should be considered even more important
in games than in other applications. That this is, and has been, recognised as
important in the games industry is proven by the multitude of inventive and effective
interface solutions that can be found in games. The HCI field indeed has much to
learn from the games industry.[17] On the other hand, the industry would have much
to benefit from the methods and research of the HCI academics when moving from
the trial-and-error/ re-invent the wheel approach to a more professional method of
user-centered development.[19]
This thesis is written entirely from an industry perspective, which lies very near
that of HCI. The view on computer games presented here is that of entertainment
products that are designed and developed to bring a fun experience to a paying
customer. What is important here is not games as cultural artefacts or games as
art form, but games simply as entertainment. This does not mean a trivialisation of
8
the games medium however. Creating fun is by no means an easy task, but rather
an art form and a craft in its own right.
2.2
Interactivity
The term interactivity has become a true buzz word with many definitions, some
of them bordering on giving the word almost magical properties. On the other
hand (or as a consequence of this), it has been argued that the word has “lost all
meaning, and has been charged with ’strong ideological undercurrents’ that have
come to represent a new, technological, way of doing things.” [Aarseth in [28]] One
example of such descriptions of interactivity is the following one, by Mark Meadows:
Interactivity is a continuing increase in participation. It’s a bidirectional
communication conduit. It’s a response to a response. It’s “full-duplex”.
Interaction is a relationship. It’s good sex. It’s bad conversation. It’s
indeterminate behavior, and it’s redundant result. It’s many things,
none of which can be done alone. Interactions is a process that dictates
communications. It can also be a communication that dictates process.
It provides options, necessitates a change in pace, and changes as you
change it.[25]
This vague paragraph contains no answers and much ambiguity, and gives us
little when trying to find a usable interpretation of the word. For a spot-on and
somewhat comical analysis of it, see chapter 2 in On Interactive Storytelling by
Chris Crawford[4]. When choosing a definition of interactivity, Crawford’s one
seems more appropriate:
A cyclic process between two or more active agents in which each agent
alternately listens, thinks and speaks.
The terms listen, think and speak in this definition must be taken metaphorically. A computer doesn’t listen, think or speak in the strict sense of the term,
but methaphorically speaking, it listens to its keyboard and mouse inputs, thinks
in terms of processing and calculating data and speaks through its screen and
loudspeakers.[4] I feel that this definition represents the essence of the word well:
there is no need to complicate matters further for no reason.
Naturally, interaction is at the core of the computer games medium, the interesting point being that it is sometimes seen as an opposite of narration.[21] Some
argument can indeed be made that the forced pacifying of a player during a cutscene,
for example, is a sign of this. On the other hand, cutscenes are not a core part of the
computer games medium and could even be seen as a temporary loan from cinema
that will disappear once this new medium have found its own mode of narration.
An interesting aspect of interaction is its relation to agency.
9
2.3
Agency
While interactivity could be considered a technical process, agency is a phenomenological result of interaction.[26] A working interactive system creates a sense of
agency in the user (player). Michael Mateas (creator of the interactive drama
Façade) writes in the group blog Grand Text Auto that agency is:
...describing what it feels like as a player/interactor to be empowered to
take whatever actions you want and get a sensible response. That is, an
experience is productive of a sense of agency if it supports the interactor
in forming intentions (based on what’s happening, the interactor can
think of something they want to do), taking action with respect to these
intentions (there is a way to express the action the interactor wants
to take), and interpreting the response in terms of the intention (the
system’s response makes sense with respect to the intention).[15]
This sense of agency that a player feels when playing a game is perhaps the
single most important difference in the computer games medium compared to other
narrative media.2 When it comes to story, the agency is however often lost in that
the player is suddenly forced to passively take part of a pre-written story with no
possibility of affecting what happens. This is perhaps the largest problem with
storytelling in games. It could be argued that this is so due to the difficulties
of adopting the cinematic narratology used in games to the new medium: The
important problem being that cinema and books have only NPCs. This means
the using of techniques from cinema is limited to the NPCs, while games have a
player-controlled character in focus: “These techniques are irrelevant to presenting
a player character, because a first-person player character is not presented, it is
experienced. It’s not empathy that we wish to promote in the player character, but
immersive agency. No film script ever had to concern itself with such a task.”[27]
While agency is based on the player’s ability to control a character (the agent)
in the game world, there are many ways of improving this sense of agency in a game
and its story. One way of minimising the loss of agency in the story part of the
game is to tie it as tightly as possible to the gameplay.
2.4
Immersion
A second phenomenological result of interaction is immersion. Immersion is also
a word commonly used in the discussion and evaluation of computer games. Immersive is a positive adjective often encountered in the praising of great games in
reviews, almost as popular as addictive. To immerse in this sense is explained as
To engage wholly or deeply; absorb: scholars who immerse themselves
in their subjects.[3]
2
I imply that computer games is a narrative medium here, even though I have chosen not to
enter that discussion. Let’s say I just mean that games can have narrative components.
10
So, the sense of immersion is to be absorbed by the game and the game world,
just like being emotionally submerged in a movie or a book. It is indisputable that a
high sense of immersion in games is important and highly desirable. When pursuing
this, there has been a tendency to see technical innovations as highways to reaching
a more immersive experience. Pierre Gander has described these tendencies as two
widespread myths about immersion:
1) that an audience’s experience will be more immersive the more sensory
information the audience is exposed to and
2) an audience who is able to intervene — be active, participatory — in
a medium will feel more immersed in the medium.[14]
Gander argues that there is no evidence of the truth of these two claims and
consequently dismisses them as myths. If this is true, why are billions of dollars
invested in new graphics hardware and new graphics engines for games every year?
Why are graphics, cinematics and sound constantly being treated in games media
as being core components of games? Why is increased freedom and interaction
in games regarded as something obviously positive? I believe this is because the
sensory information is very important in the feeling of immersion, but in the opposite
way from the one described in the myth. Immersion is not achieved by cramming in
as much sensory stimulation as possible in your game, it is achieved by eliminating
everything that opposes or disturbs the player’s feeling of immersion. This would
also be true for movies and novels. While larger text or illustrations in a book
wouldn’t necessarily increase immersion, missing pages or typos definitely disturbs
it, much in the same way as bugs, bad voice acting or obstacles/features not fitting
into the game world oppose the feeling of immersion in games. Only things actually
relevant for the experience of the game should be included. This is an old truth in
classic theater, well illustrated by the words of Anton Chekhov[5]:
If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall,
in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it’s not going
to be fired, it shouldn’t be hanging there.
Ergo, immersion is maximised by eliminating disturbing elements, with bad
parts of a game being one such element. In those game genres relying on stories
(probably the least abstract game genres), the story risks being a disturbing element
in itself if it is simply too bad.
Shenmue is a good example of a game that destroys (or disturbs) immersion by
having too many “Chekhov-rifles” in it. In Shenmue’s Hong Kong, you can enter
every restaurant, knock on every door and talk to every person, but you do not get
very much of a reaction. Gonzalo Frasca describes it like this:
I easily got tired of wandering through its streets and trying to talk to
people: I always got the same answer. The same applies for knocking
on almost every single possible door in town just to realise that nobody
11
was home. Why would the designer allow me to knock on doors if I
could never get in?
Lastly, there is another quality in stories not covered above: The inherent immersive power the story has in itself. This power is very strong indeed, as literature
shows. But remember – a game with no literature-like story at all can nonetheless
be immersive in itself.[23] The Legend of Zelda is one such example. We have two
different sources of immersion, of which only one is mandatory in a game. Imagine
the immersive power of the game that finally manages to artfully combine the two
components though!
2.5
Gameplay
Gameplay is a term used extremely often in all reviews, articles and discussions
about games. It is as difficult to define as it is common to use, however. From the
sound of the word we can determine that it has to do with the actual playing of a
game. A game with good gameplay is often simply considered a good game, and
vice versa. One straightforward definition of gameplay is made by Andrew Rollings
and Ernest Adams in On Game Design:
One or more causally linked series of challenges in a simulated environment.[6]
If we dissect this definition in short, firstly we see that gameplay goes on in
a simulated environment. This means that we are talking about what the player
has his character do in the actual game world, excluding choices and challenges
outside of that world, for example the choice of continuing to play or turning off
the game. Secondly, we are talking about causally linked challenges. This means
that gameplay needs to be challenging; merely strolling around in the game world
can’t be seen as gameplay. The causal link on a high level is something that the
story can help create3 and on the lower levels it simply means that the different
challenges are tied together logically.
In this thesis, finding the exact definition of gameplay or discussing what is good
versus bad gameplay is not in focus. Instead, the word gameplay is used rather to
denote the actual playing of the game. This is what goes on when the player is in
control of the main character, as opposed to when he is not actually playing, and
is instead, for instance, watching a cutscene or reading on-screen texts.
2.6
Storytelling
Storytelling has always been not only an important, but central part of human
culture. In the beginning, storytelling was centered around the shaman, its foremost
purpose being a way to explain nature and man’s place in the greater whole.[5] As
3
This is discussed in chapter 5
12
the bronze age cultures arose, this dramatic storytelling was separated from religion
and state and instead manifested itself in folk tales, myths and folk songs. Through
man’s winding history, the dramatic storytelling has had its twists and turns, but
has found its firm place in popular culture. While contemporary popular culture is
centered around TV and cinema, its future might well be that of computer games.
2.6.1
Storytelling in Computer Games
Since almost the beginning of games there have been two separate but somewhat
interdependent layers of storytelling involved. The first one is the story created by
the player when he plays the game. This is the story of the player’s actions and
can be re-told in first person: “First I ran towards the right, then I jumped over
a ravine and ate a mushroom.” Here, the game’s creator hasn’t created the story,
but rather the world (and this world’s rule set) that the player uses to create his
gaming experience and the stories that emerge from it. Even games as simple as
Pacman or Tennis for Two have this kind of storytelling.
The other kind is storytelling in its more classic sense: The stories created by
the game creators. These are pre-written and completed before the game is played,
merely unraveling as the player moves through the game. Already the early MUDs,
created in the late 70s, had rather complex stories of this kind in them.
This dichotomy has its mirror in literature. In classic narratology the difference between the two layers is mainly of temporal character, whereas in games this
becomes infinitely more interesting as it works on so many levels. The two layers, as defined by the early 20th century Russian formalists are fabula (story) and
sjuzet(plot):
• Story, denoting the events told, in the order they were described as happen[ing]
in. This is called fabula in the Russian terminology.
• Discourse, denoting the telling of events, in the order in which they are told.
This is the narrative as a sequence of signs, be it words or scenes in a movie.
This is also called sjuzet.[20]
With this distinction in mind, I would like to apply this terminology to games.
Changing the definitions somewhat to fit better with the games medium, fabula
would be the developer-created story that is finished and unchangeable as the game
ships, while sjuzet would be the story created by the player as he progresses through
the game. This story of the play session would consist of the parts of the story revealed as well as the player’s actions. This way, the player actions (the actual
gameplay) would be a subset of sjuzet. They would also largely be determining in
what way the story unfolds; forming the discourse. This is also the largest difference in storytelling in games versus other storytelling media – that the discourse is
influenced to such an extent by the player and potentially different in each playing
of a game. In this thesis, I will call this the player-created story.
13
Much has happened since the days of MUDs and Pacman (even though some
game theorists do not seem to have noticed). Nowadays, the challenge is to combine
these two storytelling layers into one single immersive experience. This can be seen
from two perspectives: the first seeing it as the pre-made story becoming more
interactive and the player experiencing it differently depending on his actions. The
other way of looking at it is to put the player-created story in focus, its telling
being facilitated by narrative components that strengthen and enhance the player’s
narrative experience.
The Zelda series is a fine example of the movement from player-created stories to
developer-created ones that can be seen during the last 20 years. The first games in
the series present almost no story at all to the player, merely a couple of rows of text
(and only so if the player waits a rather long time at the title screen). A little more,
in the form of a background-story, can be found in the manuals accompanying the
games. ”Clearly, the background story is offered as justification for the material of
the game itself: it is a scene-setting rationale and the overarching motivation for the
iconography and events encountered in the game.” [A. Darley in [16]] This can be
seen as the only purpose of including the rudimentary developer-created story that
exists in these games. The main focus is instead the active player: the gameplay
doesn’t pause at any time and no effort is made to carry the story forward during
the game. What defines the story is instead the player’s actions.
In the later games in the Zelda series, Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask
(and also in a primitive form already in A link to the Past), elements of storytelling (telling the developer-made story) have been introduced into the gameplay.
Now, the player isn’t any longer active and in control at all times, instead the game
pauses at times and turns the player into a passive spectator. The interactivity
is halted for the sake of narrativity. This conduct can nowadays be considered a
standard, with cutscenes appearing a large number of times in most games, even in
the more abstract ones with limited story components. Cutscenes are often used as
rewards and are shown at critical points in the game’s story, most often after the
player has completed a task of some sort. In Ocarina of Time these sequences can
sometimes be as long as 15 minutes.[16] This raises the issue of narrativity versus
interactivity that has been frequently discussed, for instance in [21].
The using of cinematic cutscenes is perhaps the most obvious way to tell a
story in a game environment, mainly because of the technical similarities of games
and cinema. In traditional narrativity there is no player, only an audience, why
there has been no question about whether the player should be forced into passivity
when the story is told or not. To take the storytelling in computer games one step
further and resolve the issue of interactivity versus narrativity, I believe this easy
way must be abandoned: computer games as a medium need to find its own mode of
narration. One example of a small but interesting step towards this has been taken
in Call of Duty where the player retains control of his character during storytelling
sequences (scripted sequences).4 The game action halts during the scripted sequence
4
Scripted sequences is one of the storytelling tools identified in the playing of the games, de-
14
(not presenting any new enemies and challenges and so forth) but the game world
doesn’t pause. The player can choose to stand passive and look and listen to what
happens, or he can run away, reload or fire his weapon, or do anything else he feels
like. The point is that this way, the immersion is not disturbed by a forced pacifying
of the player.5 A more inspired use of scripted sequences as storytelling components
can be seen as a first step towards a third way of telling stories in games. From
the non-existent story via the all-dominating religion of The Cutscene to the future
where the storytelling is finally integrated in the game-world. I believe this can and
will be taken much further in the near future.
The opposite perspective of the one presented above would be to see the story
as the main part of the game and the actual game elements as being interruptions
in the storytelling flow. It has been argued that these occurences of interactive
sequences of gameplay that aren’t closely tied to the story are proof of the nonnarrative character of games.[20] This view is one step closer to cinema, where the
story (and thereby emotional interaction between characters) is the important part
that drives the story forward. It is even considered a rule in screenwriting that any
scene that doesn’t drive the story forward or tell important things about the main
characters (or preferrably both) should be cut out.[12] However, movies include
many long sequences that can be compared to gameplay elements. Examples of this
are songs and dances in musicals and car chases and fighting scenes in action films.
Yes, these scenes often end in a way that affects the story, but nothing says that
gameplay elements can’t or don’t do that too.
2.6.2
A Note on the Interactive Nature of Storytelling
In our time, film, broadcast media and books are the dominant forms in which
storytelling is consumed, especially in the group of people that still are considered
the most typical audience of computer games - men under the age of 35. (About
60% of game players are men, and of those the majority are younger than 35.[8])
These media provide pre-designed experiences with a determined sequence of events
that can not be influenced at all by the consumer. The definition of storytelling is
then what follows: The storyteller is the active party, he is the “transmitter” that
broadcasts his message. The audience, on the other hand, is the passive “receiver” of
this message.[5] This might seem natural and almost obvious, but it is completely at
odds with the rules of classical dramaturgy. (The very dramaturgy that all modern
storytelling is resting upon.) According to Aristotle, dramaturgy is not the art of
writing great plays or stories, it is the art of communicating with an audience from
a stage. The relationship between the teller of the story and his audience reflects on
the storytelling itself; the storyteller can react to his audience’s reaction and modify
his story accordingly. This relationship and interaction with the audience put great
scribed further in chapter 4.
5
An obvious limitation in using this technique is that pre-rendered cutscenes can’t be used.
This however, is a rapidly diminishing problem as in-game graphics quality is coming closer and
closer to that of pre-rendered cinematics.
15
demands on the storyteller, but was also an important part of the classical drama;
its essence being the interaction between storyteller and audience.
With computer games, we again have this opportunity of communication between the storyteller (the game) and the audience (the player) as opposed to the
one-sided communication of “traditional” media. The game software can react and
adapt to the player’s actions and (perceived) preferences. With this perspective,
computer games, interestingly, is one step closer to storytelling in its purest (classical) form. Quite the opposite of what is commonly argued.
2.7
Narratology Versus Ludology
There has been some debate on whether game studies should treat games mainly as
a narrative medium, using theories from narratology, or if game studies should be
considered a field of its own. This has been called the narratology versus ludology
debate. Rather than being an argumentation between two well-established schools
of researchers, this debate is a product of fuzzy definitions and misconceptions.
The main misconceptions being that ludologists are supposed to focus on game
mechanics and reject any room in the field for analysing games as narrative and
narratologists arguing that games are closely connected to stories, if not being
stories in themselves.[11]
Gonzalo Frasca suggests that the two opposing sides do not really exist outside
the minds of the game researchers themselves. Not surprisingly, many researchers
have claimed to be in a middle position, representing a more balanced point of view
while none seem to have claimed to be narratologists. The other side in the conflict,
the Ludologists, are eager to point out that they do not at all oppose the notion
of narrative components in games.[11] In this light, Frascas proposition that the
debate never existed does not seem so far-fetched.
For the purpose of this thesis, it is sufficient to state that computer games are
structures that allow narrative elements to be included. This is also where I believe most game researchers will arrive, if they haven’t already. Further, some game
genres might allow a completely new way of telling stories, perhaps revolutionising
storytelling as much as cinema did in the last century. The main objection to this
would be the alleged incompatibility of interaction and storytelling. This argument
leads me to think of live role-playing: what is a live role-play if not a continuous process where several entities (people) through interaction create a story while
telling it? One might think that doing this in a computer environment might not be
feasible yet, but it has already been done. The games in the MMORPG genre allow
exactly this kind of interaction between players, and many of the users actually
choose to play the games this way: using the game as a platform for role-playing
with their friends, creating a story as they play. This still leaves much to the players
though, and much more must be done if we are to make a creative and believable
dungeon master out of the computer. This might seem like an insurmountable obstacle, but we have to remember that games and game studies are moving forward
16
rapidly. The field of games studies can’t limit itself to the reflection and analysis
of present and past, rather it must occupy itself with the possibilities of the future.
The frames of games aren’t static like the laws of physics, they are constantly being
revised as talented people push the medium further and further. In this sense, they
are edges rather than frames, where frames have a limiting role while edges are just
a snapshot of where a moving frontier is at any given moment.
17
Chapter 3
Method
Most of the discussion and analysis in this report is based on first-hand game playing. Focus is on the four games played and analysed during the writing of this
report, but experiences from other games played have had their natural impact on
the work as well. When playing the games, I have mainly been looking at how
their stories have been integrated into them, but also at the connection between
player choices and written/scripted story. Another area is the level of facilitation
the game provides for the discourse layer or player-created story – the story that is
made through the playing of the game.1
A second large source of knowledge is, of course, the reading of literature on the
subject, the bulk of the reading being made in the first few weeks of the four and a
half months dedicated to this work.
The third and last area of input for the report has been interviews and discussions with designers at Avalanche Studios, regarding their views on storytelling in
games and their experiences from the development of Just Cause.
3.1
Analysing Games
Game analysis has long been confined to mathematics and social sciences, and has
not until fairly recently become a subject of humanistic study and gradually begun
to form a field of its own. Computer games researcher Espen Aarseth estimates
the age of the study of game aesthetics to be less than 20 years.[1] Earlier having
been considered simple toys of no aesthetic or intellectual quality, games are now
increasingly being recognised as works of art and culture. Even with this recognition
of games as being more than primitive toys, the realisation that games are a unique
art form demanding a unique method for analysis seems to be lagging behind.
There have been many attempts to conform games to older media for the sake of
analysis and no general approach to analysing games has been accepted yet. A
few academics have suggested methods though, one of them being Lars Konzack of
1
Facilitation tools can, as we will see, be numerous: NPCs taunting/praising the player, visual
character feedback, other character development features, items, choices, and more.
18
Aalborg University. Konzack argues that game analysis has to be made based on
the unique traits of games as a medium, rather than being derived from methods
of analysis from older media.[22] With the complete game in focus, instead of just
those parts of it fitting into an existing method of analysis, Konzack identifies no
less than seven interdependent layers to be analysed:
1. Hardware: Wires, signals, hardware and components.
2. Program code: The actual source code of the game.
3. Function: The behaviour of the computer and the computer’s interface reactions to user input. At this layer we are not even aware we are in fact dealing
with a game – it could be any application.
4. Gameplay: At this layer the game structure also known as gameplay resides. Here the computer software application is recognised as a game. This is
closely related to ludology; the study of games and their different game factors:
positions, resources, space and time, goal (sub-goals), obstacles, knowledge,
rewards or penalties.
5. Meaning: The semantic meaning of the computer game, which can be significant or near to none. This is best studied through the use of semiotics:
the study of the meaning of signs.
6. Referentiality: Referentiality becomes apparent when comparing computer
games with other games and other media. Here, the characteristics of the game
setting and genre are targeted. These characteristics are signs, ornaments or
game structures that have originally been used in other media or other games,
and which have been put into use in the game we are about to analyse.
7. Socio-culture: The social layer in which analysis of the culture around computer games takes place, thereby mostly the observing of the environment
where play occurs. This includes both the interaction between computer game
and player and the interrelationship between all participants of the game.
This is an interesting approach, and it has some merit because of its acknowledgement of the complexity of the computer game and the demands this places on
the analysis of the same. Konzacks layers are most interesting from this point of
view; coming to terms with mistakes in the past2 and recognising the uniqueness
of the computer game as a medium. When looking for a practical methodology
however, Konzacks approach is not very useful. In discussing Konzacks method,
Aarseth proposes that while it could certainly be argued that each layer should be
taken into consideration for a complete analysis of a game, most of the time some
layers would be of much greater importance than others and “most games are not
2
By that I mean arguing that narrativity doesn’t exist in computer games, and its opposite:
trying to impose methods from literature or cinema on games.
19
very interesting in all of these layers, and few present us with real innovations in
more than one or two.”[1] Aarseth further suggests using Konzacks method as an
open framework, focusing on 2-4 layers and ignoring the rest.
As mentioned in chapter two, I use an HCI-perspective in this thesis – seeing the
game firstly as an entertainment product with usability and fun-factor as its most
important properties. With the HCI approach, the user (player) is in focus and what
is interesting is how the game interacts with the user and what the user experiences
when playing the game. Technical aspects (hardware, graphics, code, sound effects
and music) fall outside this scope and are seen merely as tools for creating an
entertainment experience, rather than targets for analysis in themselves. From this
perspective and when looking at the story as a part of the gameplay experience,
several of Konzacks layers can be immediately dismissed.
Hardware and program code strike me as being the least interesting, not only
from my perspective, but also in any analysis of the game as entertainment. These
influence the gaming experience in the same way the typography or paper of a book,
or the screen size and quality of a TV influences those media experiences. They
are important, but not so in their own right, only as tools for delivering the actual
content. When analysing a game, its nature is important to bear in mind, but it
seems overly zealous to spend time on these technical aspects. Function falls partly
into this category too, but is closer to the gameplay experience.
The, socio-culture layer also falls outside the scope of this thesis. In multiplayer
games these aspects might have a place in-game, but in singleplayer games, this
layer exists outside the game.
The remaining few layers are more in line with the questions discussed here.
Gameplay, meaning and referentiality are all important aspects in the playing of a
game, with meaning and referentiality emanating in large part from the story. The
purpose of this thesis could even be seen as being an investigation of the possibilities
of creating synergies in these three layers by minimising the distance between them.
Aarseth[1] tries a new definition of the games discussed here as “games in virtual
environments”. This is to get rid of computerised games that don’t really belong in
the family, such as Black Jack in your browser or Who wants to be a Millionaire on
CD-ROM. He then suggests three dimensions that characterise “games in virtual
environments”:
• Gameplay (the player’s actions, strategies and motives)
• Game-structure (the rules of the game, including the simulation rules)
• Game-world (fictional content, topology/level design, textures etc.)
This model is more interesting than Konzack’s in that it focuses on the gameness of a game – the traits and characteristics that form the actual game-playing
experience. In the list quoted above, gameplay seems to have its common meaning,
but later Aarseth seems to lean towards a more social meaning of the word, separating it somewhat from the playing of a game and moving towards player-player
20
interaction. The social aspect of games seems to take over the gameplay dimension.
If choosing to at all include this in a model for game analysis, I would rather see it
in a dimension of its own, and the very closely related game-structure and gameplay
merged together into one. In any case, this first step of categorising different central
aspects of games is very interesting and surely worthy of further development.
As there are no established or fully satisfactory methods for game analysis yet,
non-theoretical analysis based on actual playing of games seems to be the premier
method. Even though game analysis in itself is not the purpose of this thesis, I have
chosen to play and analyse the story parts of four games to get material and ideas
on storytelling methods, and to get a practical real-world base for my theoretical
discussion.
So, if using Aarseths three dimensions, my game playing focuses on the game
world dimension and specifically the fictional content, looking at how this has been
placed in the game and in what ways the fictional content is conveyed to the player.
3.2
Playing the Games
When playing the games, I chose to play them through from start to finish, spending
most of the time on following the main story missions. When presented with choices
or interesting branch points, I have replayed those parts of the game to be able to
explore the consequences of following another branch.
During play, notes were taken on the development of the story and on things
that drew attention in either a positive or negative way. Notes were also taken on
the perceived quality of the story told and the ways in which it was presented. The
use of different storytelling tools were looked at in particular; the object being to
find and identify every tool that can be used to convey story in games. Looking
at the methods and tools used successfully in these massively successful games is
an effective way of getting a feeling for where the development is right now and
how far we have come in storytelling in games. On the other hand, succeeding
in identifying problems and mistakes is even more rewarding when we are looking
to improve something. Therefore, places where specific storytelling tools were not
employed but could have been were looked for in particular, as well as areas and
features not working so well in these games. The hits of today is where the basis for
tomorrow’s development is found and, for the purpose of this paper, the foundation
for further discussion and analysis of future possibilities.
This method of investigation could be seen as a participatory observation, a term
borrowed from ethnography. This means that the researcher participates in the
environment, culture or activities that are investigated, instead of being a passive
observer looking on from the sideline. Even though this method is comparatively
shallow, it felt perfectly adequate for the purpose of this thesis. Going into a deeper
or complete analysis of the large and complex games in question would require a
vast amount of time, especially as we have seen that there is no fully satisfactory
method for analysing games. With the main objective of play being to find the
21
modes or tools of telling story and looking at particularly inspiring mistakes and
successes in the using of the tools, a thorough play through of each game would
seem sufficient.
The actual hours spent playing the games are as follows (effective game time):
Just Cause: 10hrs (+approx. 300hrs prior to the work of this thesis being
done)
Gun: 14hrs
GTA: San Andreas: 40hrs (+approx. 80hrs playing the GTA series prior
to this work)
Fable: 36hrs
3.3
Literature Studies
A major part of the input for writing this report has come from the studying of relevant literature. The preparation for the work consisted mainly of a five-week reading
period to tune in on the particulars, although I have kept on reading continuously
during the whole twenty weeks. Much of the articles and theses read ended up
working mainly as inspiration, not being cited in the report and not making it into
the bibliography. A couple of these (as well as a couple that are in the bibliography)
that I feel are particularly interesting are mentioned in the last chapter.
3.4
Interviews with Developers
The interviews conducted with employees at Avalanche Studios were unstructured
interviews. In these the researcher has a number of predetermined topics to cover
but the precise questions and the order in which they are presented are not fixed.
This way, the questions are allowed to develop during the interview, and interesting
topics or answers from the interviewee can be explored further. The interviewee
has the freedom to say as much, or as little as he or she chooses to. With this form
of questionnaire the comparability aspect between interviews is sacrificed but the
data acquired is potentially richer and with deeper qualities.
The goal of the interviews was mainly to get other perspectives on storytelling
and to explore the developers’ feelings about Just Cause and what can be made
better in the genre. With this objective, rather than aiming to get quantifiable
data on developers’ opinions in general, this choice of questionnaire seemed fairly
obvious. Naturally, the developers views on the story parts of game design in general
were discussed as well. In the next section follows a list of the main questions asked.
In addition to interviews and informal chatting about game design, two roundtable discussions were held. In the first of these, the advantages of story in games
and the definitions of the storytelling tools were discussed. The second discussion
focused on the usage of the tools and their strengths and weaknesses in several
22
areas, for instance in the telling of developer-created story and the facilitation of
player-created story.
Notes were taken on all occasions.
3.4.1
Interview Questions
The following questions were used as a basis of discussion in the unstructured interviews.
What do you believe are the biggest advantages of including a story in a game?
How big is the importance of game genre when designing the story component?
How important for the gameplay experience is it to have a story at all? How
important is its quality? Is the answer different depending on genre?
Name an example of a game with a great story. What made it good?
Name an example of a game with a bad story. Why was it bad?
Is story necessary or even preferable in an action game like Just Cause?
In Just Cause, how was the story integrated into the design work?
What is the main purpose of the story in Just Cause? (Has this been discussed?)
What would you do differently if you were to redo the story implementation
of Just Cause?
3.5
Method Critique
This work is based very much on my own subjective thoughts on and analysis of
the games medium and a few games in particular. The work consisting mainly on
a discussion about the concepts and problems in question and not being the result
of a quantifiable method naturally has its implications. The conclusions drawn and
arguments made do rest firmly on the success of the games used as examples and also
prior research on the subject. On several occasion I disagree with earlier research
however, and instead present my own thoughts. This makes this thesis more about
presenting a believable analysis with a reasonable conclusion than presenting a truth
proven by numbers from empirical experiments.
The subjectiveness is further limited by the input from discussions and interviews with lead designers at Avalanche Studios. It should however be noted that
this input, even though it is from seasoned game design professionals, could be
deemed subjective as well and is not always representing the “truth” of game design. The consulted game development professionals being from one single company
23
is of course also a negative factor. This produces situated results, meaning that they,
strictly speaking, are not valid outside the context they have been found in.
One thing that might have been a mistake is that the developer interviews and
discussions were scheduled rather late in the work process. They were also pushed
to even later dates because of the high work load that the lead designers experienced
during the time of writing of this thesis. This led to the main ideas and classifications already having been formed when the discussions were held. Therefore, the
developers’ opinions didn’t have a chance to affect the direction and structure of the
thesis project. Once the discussions were held I found that the developers largely
agreed with my main classifications however. The discussions could then be based
on the ideas I had already outlined and thus became very focused on, and relevant
for, the central issues of the thesis.
24
Chapter 4
Results
In this chapter, the games played and the immediate conclusions and results from
the game-playing are presented. Each game’s section is divided in two smaller ones:
one about the game as such and one recounting the most significant parts of the
story in short. An important result from the playing of the games is the list of the
tools used for storytelling in games. A section on them can be found at the end of
the chapter.
Working with the storytelling tools presupposes that we have chosen to have a
story at all, however. Therefore, we will first take a close look at the purposes and
advantages of having stories in games. This section is more a result of analysis than
a direct result of the games played, but is included here rather than in the analysis
chapter to serve as a background for the game sections.
Note: Results of interviews and discussions with game developers do not have a section in this chapter. Instead, quotations from the interviews can be found adjacent
to the arguments they support where applicable.
4.1
The Benefits of Storytelling in Games
In the beginning, the sole purpose of stories in games was to put the gameplay
into some sort of context: to transform coloured quads into mythical monsters and
heroes or spaceships. The games medium didn’t permit storytelling in-game, so the
player would have to resort to the manual when looking for story. Even in these
primitive cases, the story can be said to have added a degree of immersion, as crude
graphics, in the mind of the player, were suddenly transformed into epic struggles
between good and evil or something like that. This important role of stories in
games has remained virtually unchanged since then. In today’s games, the stories
still bring context to the gameplay elements and life to the game’s characters and
world. (But now, hopefully, to a much greater extent.)
Immersion is not all story brings, however. Provided the story and the sto-
25
rytelling medium is capable1 enough, the story can also bring a certain degree of
motivation. With a gripping story arc and sympathetic or detestable characters
(preferably both), the story creates an urge to bring it forward through playing
the game. This can be divided into two related areas: First, the motivation to
play further because the player wants to see what happens next. And secondly, the
motivation to play further because the player is emotionally touched, entangled, or
even enthralled in the story and feels an urge to play the main character’s part in
the game’s universe. Another way of saying this is that the story helps turning extrinsic motivators into intrinsic ones[9]. The extrinsic motivators are, as the word
implies, motivators that come from outside – the getting of rewards or the pleasing
of other people. One example of this is mission objectives stated in the game. The
player will carry out an objective simply because he is told to and understands that
it is a requirement to advance in the game. When a player internalises the objective
and makes it his own, feeling that he wants to carry out the objective because he is
emotionally inclined to do so, it has shifted into being an intrinsic motivator. This
shift is exactly what a good story can create.
This motivation can be made great use of, as it incites players to play through
even the dullest of missions as long as the story is good enough. In that sense, the
story can be used to render mistakes in game design and lulls in gameplay harmless.
A safety net, if you will.
Another advantage of story that can be considered motivational is the feeling
of closure, or the “sense of narrative satisfaction, the "ahhh" feeling that you get
when you come to the end of a good book or movie.”[2] In a sandbox game, the true
ending might be when the player has earned all the cash, driven all the cars, found
all the secrets or killed all the bad bosses. The satisfaction and feeling of closure
when reaching this goal is not at all as immense as the one a narrative ending can
bring however.
So, the immersive qualities of stories have been a driving force for their inclusion
in games from the beginning and the motivational qualities came into the picture
later. Then the newest, and still most undeveloped, quality of stories in games is
the experiencing of storytelling for its own sake. I call it undeveloped because most
(almost all) stories in games are still primitive and of considerably lower quality than
those of cinema, for instance. The joy of viewing, listening to or even participating
in a story can be great, but so far the computer games medium has had little to
offer here. The last few years’ developments in this area are promising though, with
games such as Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, the Max Payne series and Fahrenheit
(called Indigo Prophecy in the USA) often being named in this context. There is
reason to believe that we will see a rapid development in this area because of the
merging of the film and games businesses, if for no other reason.2
1
By capable in this case I mean having such a high level of quality that a significant sense of
immersion in story and game world is created.
2
There is not only the obvious connection that most large film IPs become games (and sometimes vice versa). Another example of work in this direction is the huge film and video game
crossover conference Hollywood and Games Summit held in Beverly Hills 2006.
26
The fourth thing a story brings to a game is cohesiveness. Many players could
probably agree when Freeman says: “I’ve experienced more than one game where
the various missions seemed very disjointed, and the world they took place within
felt fragmented.”[12] These games have probably failed in the story component,
or failed to include one altogether. However, like in learning and education, a
narrative structure can bring meaning to otherwise seemingly disconnected parts of
knowledge or gameplay. As Odd Ahlgren, Content Director at Avalanche Studios
says: “Story is what prevents a game from just being a series of disconnected events
lined up one after the other.”3 You can even go as far as saying that the “cognitive
process of assimilating information can be characterised as the telling of a tale
that incorporates both what is already known and what is to be added, assigning
a plausible combination of cause and effect.”[24] This cohesiveness is every bit as
important in a game as in a learning situation, and bringing cohesiveness is perhaps
the most important of these four advantages. This is because the use of narrative
is the premier way of tying the disparate gameplay elements a game often includes
together into one cohesive experience.
So, the four main benefits of stories in games are:
• Immersion
• Motivation
• Cohesiveness
• Storytelling in itself
Of these, mainly the first three are relevant for this thesis. The fourth, storytelling in itself, is an important motivation for having story in games, but is not
intertwined with and affecting gameplay in the same sense as the others. While the
other three concern ways that story contributes to other parts of the game and the
story’s ties to gameplay, the fourth is an area of its own and has a purpose in itself.
Also, when looking at genres and games focusing on fast-paced action/arcade
gameplay in particular, there is less room for story and the objective to tell an emotionally compelling story becomes a challenge that is not always worth prioritising.
The amount of development resources and player attention during play needed to
reach a satisfying level in this area perhaps makes it more suitable for RPGs and
other games where a larger story component is expected.
With this distinction in mind, I am concentrating on immersion, motivation and
cohesiveness, while I consider the fourth benefit of story in games, storytelling in
itself, to be separate from the discussion of forging gameplay and story together.
Now on to the playing of the games.
3
From a personal interview at Avalanche Studios.
27
4.2
Fable
Fable (see figure 4.1), being created by the famous Peter Molyneux, is an action
RPG mainly recognised for its character development qualities. Following his tradition, Molyneux created an enormous hype around the game before its release –
giving the impression of Fable being a totally unique new game introducing a player
freedom that until then could only be dreamt about. Also following the tradition
however, Fable proved not to be what was expected. Despite many of the features
promised not making it into the released product, it is still a very nice game though.
Most parts of Fable work just like in any action RPG, with characters having three
main skill areas, one each for ranged weapons, melee weapons and spells, gaining
experience in each for using the skills of that area.
Figure 4.1. Screenshot from Fable. A typical warrior-character that is not wearing
his armor or clothes because of Fable’s boasting system: the player can get extra
money by boasting that he will complete a quest with some special conditions met.
In this case, completing it without armor.
The main feature separating Fable from the basic RPG is the improved character
development, letting player choices actually reflect visibly on the main character
(building muscle, aging and scarring, tattoos and haircuts and more) and having
28
the world’s inhabitants react to the player character accordingly. The main choice
concerning the character’s development is whether the player wants him to be bad
or nice. Many deeds that can be performed are considered evil or good and give the
player points affecting his alignment. NPC reactions and visual attributes are then
influenced accordingly: a good player might get butterflies circling him, while the
evil one gets to sport a couple of fancy horns. Many sub-quests and minor tasks
or mini-games that are not tied to the storyline or the character alignment are also
included in the game however, adding to the experience of building a character
and his life in the world of Fable. Examples of this are gambling, fishing, flirting,
chicken-kicking and marriage.
Fable has received some criticism for delivering a playing experience that is too
short (i e to few hours of gameplay before the end of the storyline is reached). Fans
of the game answer this humorously, saying that bragging about how fast you can
complete Fable is like bragging about how fast you can finish when having sex.
This tells us that the fun and value of the sub-quests and mini-games of Fable are
regarded quite highly. The game receiving critique for being too short could also
be seen as a high motivational quality of the story making players focus more on
advancing the storyline and turning away from actions unrelated to it.4
4.2.1
Fable’s Story
The story begins in an idyllic setting, with the player controlling a little boy living
in a village with his parents and sister. After a few introductory minutes of kicking
chicken and either getting into mischief or doing good deeds to please the boys’
father, the player is presented with the inciting event of the game: Bandits attack
the village, slaughter its inhabitants and the boy’s family, and burns it to the ground.
As the boy gets out of hiding and is faced with the destruction, a mysterious and
seemingly powerful man appears. This is Maze, the leader of the Hero’s Guild who
is to become the boy’s caretaker after his family is gone. Soon, the player finds the
boy being an apprentice in training at the Guild a few years later. It becomes clear
to the player that the boy, who is now a young man, is some kind of “chosen one”,
who has special powers running in his family, although the main quest so far seems
to limit itself to avenging the boy’s family. After a few minor training tasks have
been completed and a few NPCs have been introduced, the main character (MC) is
released into the game world and the actual game begins.
After a while, it is revealed that the MC’s sister and mother are still alive and
after a couple of twists and turns, the evil villain of the game is presented: Jack
of Blades. It becomes clear that he is not only the mastermind behind the MC’s
family’s woe, but is also plotting to take over the world. Much like most super
villains. A couple of interesting incentives are produced to motivate the player to
pursue and kill Jack of Blades: The MC is imprisoned and tortured before managing
to escape, and later, the MC’s mother has her throat slit by Jack of Blades just
4
It should be noted though, that every game with not so many hours of story-related gameplay
receive criticism for being too short no matter how much other content there is.
29
before the final fight. Fable not being very gory or overly violent up until that
moment, the killing of the mother becomes quite an unpleasant surprise to the
player. This certainly has its desired effect of alarming the player and inciting a
feeling of anger and disgust toward the villain – adding motivation.
At the end of the game, after having defeated Jack of Blades in battle, the
player gets the choice of cutting down his blind sister to get the ultimate power
from the villain’s magical sword and her blood combined, or destroying the sword.
This choice is open no matter if the player has chosen to play an evil or a good
character throughout the game.
Although I don’t find the actual story of Fable to be of a particularly high
quality, its implementation and integration into the game is done very well. Many
tools are used, making the story fit naturally into the game world and making it
feel present not only in cutscenes and such, but also during play. This allows a not
so great story to add much to the playing experience.
4.3
GTA: San Andreas
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas(see figure 4.2) is the fifth, and arguably the best,
installment in the famous GTA series. Building on the free gameplay from the
earlier games, GTA 3 and GTA: Vice City, GTA: San Andreas takes the concept
further in many respects. Increasing the size and scope of the game world from
one city to three cities and the countryside in between is one. Another important
positive change is the inclusion of a strong story, brought to life by the voices of
many well-known actors, including Samuel L Jackson and Peter Fonda. This is
interesting, as it shows that a strong and serious story can be included successfully
in a fast-paced action game without slowing down the game or inhibiting gameplay.
Worth noting is that story-wise, the player has no choices in GTA: San Andreas.
At every given point in the game, the player can choose from a few different missions
to accomplish, but the results of a completed mission is always the same. A failed
mission does not have an impact on the story, as the player is simply allowed to try
it again. Although each storyline (connected to a specific NPC) is clearly linear, this
choice in which NPC to approach for the next mission adds a feeling of non-linearity.
4.3.1
GTA: San Andreas’ Story
As the game begins, Carl Johnson (CJ) has just returned to San Andreas, a fictional
version of Los Angeles in the early nineties, to visit his mother’s funeral. He has
been living in Liberty City, the game world’s version of New York, for 5 years, as a
result of his brother Brian’s murder making him want to leave the thug life behind.
30
Figure 4.2. Screenshot from Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. The player is running
on foot carrying an automatic rifle. All cars in the game can be hijacked, provided
that they are moving slowly enough for CJ to rip open one of their doors.
But when CJ returns, the gang life of the Los Santos district in San Andreas pulls
him back in as he is reacquainted with his brother Sweet and his gangster friends
Ryder and Big Smoke. Together forming the center of The Orange Grove Families
gang, they have to take back the streets from a tough and determined enemy – a
rivaling gang called The Ballas.
Early in the game, the story struggles with providing the player with motivation
to be a gangster. This is quite important, as the game is largely about committing
crimes and killing people. To achieve this, the good-hearted main character is
harassed by corrupt police officers and the player is informed about the wrongdoings
of the evil Ballas. This is to give the player the motivation and sense of immersion
in the character necessary to take on the role of a criminal.
As the story unfolds, several other factions come into play, including the mafia,
and the plot thickens. A large host of characters is introduced and every-day gangster business, girlfriends and car chases are mixed with more spectacular events in
CJ’s life. The game boasting nearly a hundred missions and each one of them contributing to the story of San Andreas makes the game rich with narrative content
and the story too long to fully recount here. Worth noting is that the story of GTA:
31
San Andreas is widely considered to be the best of the GTA series so far and also a
prime example of an extraordinarily complex, well-written and engaging story for
a computer game.
4.4
Gun
Gun(see figure 4.3) is a third-person free-roaming action adventure set in the wild
west of the nineteenth century. The player takes on a number of missions, closely
following the twists and turns of the storyline created by a rather famous Hollywood
writer – a fact that has been used to some extent in the marketing of the game.
Just as in GTA: San Andreas, Hollywood talent has also been used for the voice
acting.
Figure 4.3. Screenshot from Gun. A getaway on horseback. The horseback riding
system in Gun is well-designed and the controls work very well.
Using many cutscenes and quite short and narrow gameplay sequences between
them, the game’s story is ever present during play and the free-roaming elements
take a minor part. This makes Gun the game (of the four games played) that is
most controlled by and dependent upon its story. Only minor side missions and
activities exist outside the main story missions. This has led to a fair amount of
criticism, especially as the main story missions can be beaten in only six to eight
hours of play. In Neversoft’s (creators of Gun) defense however, the story missions
are well-designed and exhibit a remarkable diversity in gameplay, ranging from
buffalo hunting to assaulting a frontier fort, ambushing a train and chasing bandits
on horseback.
32
The close relation between gameplay and story also provides a good foundation
for a high sense of immersion in the storyline, as the current state of the story and
the last cutscene seen are always in recent memory.
4.4.1
Gun’s Story
As the game begins the main character, Colton White, is out hunting buffalo with his
father. This fairly easy hunting mission is used cleverly as a story-related tutorial,
introducing the most important moves and controls as well as providing a rather
idyllic picture of Colton’s life before he is dragged into the schemes of bandits.
Following a bear attack where Colton has to save his father, the story continues on
board a steamboat on the nearby river. In a sudden attack set in motion by an evil
preacher and his henchmen, the father is killed and Colton narrowly escapes death.
Waking up on the river bank much later, Colton is faced with the fact that he
is the only survivor from the attack on the steamboat and that the man he thought
was his father was in fact just a close friend of his real father. Ripped from his
previous life, Colton embarks on a journey to get revenge for the deaths on the
steamboat and to seek his roots.
To provide further motivation for the player to seek revenge and hunt down the
bandits (i.e. play on), the same method as in Fable is used – the villains commit
several acts of excessive violence to innocents. In one scene for example, the player
sees one of the bandit bosses using a pair of pliers to pull out a man’s teeth in a
spray of blood.
As in most games, the main character’s personal misery is proven to be a side
effect of a larger scheme set in motion by an evil super-villain (albeit the super-villain
does not have superpowers in this game, thankfully). Moving up the food-chain and
killing off the deputies of the big boss one by one, the player is finally faced with
one final epic fight against the man behind it all – the evil Magruder.
4.5
Just Cause
Just Cause is described like this in a press release:
In Just Cause (see Figure 4.4), you take on the role of the flamboyant
Rico Rodriguez — an undercover CIA operative specialising in regime
change – as he tries to overthrow the corrupt government of San Esperito. This rogue South American island is suspected of stockpiling
WMDs and it’s your job to negate the threat to world peace. It could
be to your advantage that this tropical paradise is about to implode as
various factions vie for power – it just needs a gentle nudge in the right
direction.
Just Cause offers the freedom to tackle your assignment however you
want: play the island’s factions off against one another; incite a rebellion
among the masses; or build alliances with rebel forces and drug cartels.
33
The incredibly detailed game world consists of 1,225 square miles of
mountains, jungles, beaches, cities and villages which can be explored
by land, sea and air. And you will have at your disposal one of the most
varied and exciting array of vehicles, planes and watercraft ever seen in
a video game.
Figure 4.4. Screenshot from Just Cause. Flying a plane in the tropical sunset of
San Esperito. This plane is one of almost a hundred vehicles available to the player.
The game has 20 main missions organised linearly with most of them starting
and/or ending with an FMV. As the game begins, the player is immediately tossed
into the first one, but for the rest of the game the player can choose when to go on
to the next story mission, much like in the other games played. In between the main
missions, the player can choose to do side missions, take over parts of San Esperito,
or just run or drive around causing random harm to those unfortunate enough to
be in the way. This works very much like GTA: San Andreas, except that there are
often several story mission to choose from at any given moment there.
The story in Just Cause mainly brings cohesiveness, explaining the connection
between missions. As the story (or even the atmosphere of the game) doesn’t strive
to be emotionally gripping or profound, the motivational and immersive qualities
are at a minimum. This style fits well with the tropical playground of explosions
and vehicles that San Esperito is, but it is quite clear that more advantages from
the story component could have been gained with a comparatively small investment
in time.
34
4.5.1
Just Cause’s Story
The story of Just Cause is perhaps best described by its creators. The following
text is from the concept documents of the Just Cause production:
San Esperito, a tropical paradise turned hell. The power balance between the military, drug barons, police, and oppositional guerillas is
very delicate, maintained only by a very fragile bond of fear and insecurity. Things are about to blow up soon. They just need a small push
in the right direction. That is where you come in.
You are Rico Rodriguez; longtime cloak and dagger field man and CIA
operative. It is your mission to overthrow the corrupt presidente of this
small-time banana republic and help the CIA gain control of the power
and the drug trade. By playing all the powerful groups of the island
against each other this might be done. But only a maniac would ever
consider trying it. A maniac or Rico Rodriguez.
Two ranking agents are already on the spot; the battle-hardened cynic
Sheldon and the stunningly beautiful female operative Kane. They are
two most sinister dandies traveling around the island in a luxurious
mobile home, always in touch with what is going on. They will distribute
your missions and fill you in on details as the game unravels.
Sheldon and Kane fill you in on what must be done to topple the power
of the president and the cartels. You are a one man army against a whole
nation of heavily armed, drug crazed and power hungry desperados. The
jungles are filled with bandits, soldiers, corrupt militiamen and cokedup cartel pistoleros. It takes a special breed to remain alive in this
tropical hell. You will encounter a vast gallery of colorful and dangerous
characters, some of whom you must befriend and make your allies. Your
missions will include freeing a guerilla leader from prison and romancing
his beautiful sister, assassinating a drug kingpin and assume his identity
while flirting with the cartel boss’s wife, and blowing up a corrupt police
chief’s luxury yacht. There is plenty of action to go around as you kill a
whore-mongering general, napalm bomb coca fields and set off a small
nuclear bomb, wiping out an entire island. And you are only just getting
started.
The jungle heat is turned up another couple of notches as you must
assassinate El presidentes two sons at an international arms convention
and thus start a revolution. Amid the chaos erupting on the street,
continue pursuing the missions dealt to you by the ever partying Kane
and Sheldon. [...]
All this work to finally attack El Presidente himself on his private island
Isla Montalban. Here a minor war is raging between cartel henchmen,
guerillas, military and El presidentes private militia “the black hand”.
35
In the midst of all this, the corrupt Presidente decides to try to cover
his tracks by launching several nuclear missiles. [...] Kill all the black
hand guards, find El Presidente and kill him, then get the hell out of
there [...] Another day, another dollar. Another pissant regime that has
to be toppled.
This story is conveyed chiefly through the pre-rendered videos that are shown
before and/or after many of the 20 story missions. The few other tools used mainly
concern vital information for the player to get the job done, e g mission objectives,
and have limited narrative content.
4.6
The Telling of Story in the Games Played
All four games played make a distinction between story missions and side missions,
with this distinction being more or less outspoken. This allows the advantages of a
linear story together with the gameplay and freedom of sandbox gameplay. There
is also a choice for the player when to accept the next mission to bring the story
further, allowing the player to experience any amount of free gameplay he likes
before going on with the less interactive and less free story missions. This is mostly
done through having the player go to a specific location to get the next mission.
In other terms, the developer-created story is not forced upon the player (apart
from the first mission (or first few missions), designed to teach the player the basic
controls and draw him into the plot and the game world). Instead, it can be
experienced in small chunks at the player’s own discretion, with free gameplay (rich
with player-created story) in between. Through this clear division of gameplay, the
problem of the complexity and development costs of true interactive storytelling
can be avoided, yet some of its advantages are retained. This is however a step
away from the holy grail of true interactive storytelling: where player-created and
developer-created story meets.
This free gameplay allows intricate storylines to be included even in the most
action-oriented games – because of the free roaming, a player only looking for quick
action can play and not choose to do story missions even though they are there. A
more limited/linear game forces the player to experience and take part in the story
and play within its constraints every single play session. In GTA: San Andreas and
other games like it, you can play story missions and follow the rather serious story
one day and just go around blowing things up another day.
With this said, we come to the most concrete finding from the playing of the
games: the different methods or tools for telling story present in them. I have
identified eleven tools used to tell story in games. I choose to call them tools
instead of ways, because the term tools comes closer to the truth as it implies that
one can (and should) use many tools together. The opposite of this would be way;
this term suggests that one must choose one way of storytelling and stick with it.
Also, there is nothing in a tool itself that guarantees success – it can be used for
either great or disastrous effect.
36
Many games use a few of these tools and some use most of them (Fable is one
such game, using all but one). The eleven tools in the list below cover all ways of
conveying story in the computer games of today.5
• Pre-rendered video: (Often called FMVs, Full Motion Videos) Pre-rendered
cinematic scenes, pausing the game and locking user input. Example: In Just
Cause, the player is treated to a pre-rendered video clip at the beginning and
end of every main mission.
• In-game cutscenes: Cinematic scenes that are played out within the game
engine, (i.e. using the same models and environments that are used for the
actual game) pausing gameplay and locking user input. Example: In-game
cutscenes with high cinematic quality are used extensively in Gun, often including quite a bit of violence to induce dislike for the game’s villains.
• Scripted sequences: The same as cutscenes, but without locking user input:
the player retains full control of his character during the scripted sequence
and the gameplay is not halted. Many missions and tasks are implemented
as scripted sequences without them conveying any story. The distinction
here is that the sequence must mediate some kind of narrative content to be
considered a storytelling tool. Example: As mentioned above, Call of Duty
uses scripted sequences in a great way, never taking away control of the main
character and allowing the player to lose the feeling of agency.
• Voice-over: Voice over during play – a narrator’s, the main character’s or
another character’s voice conveying story. The distinction here being that this
does not pause or inhibit gameplay in any way. Technically this is a scripted
sequence, but to the player there is a difference in that the voice-over doesn’t
intrude in the gameplay. Although voice-over could be considered a subset
of scripted sequences, this distinction is important: the voice-over is a more
subtle tool with its own areas of use. Example: Voice-over is used cleverly
in GTA: San Andreas when the main character and supporting NPCs are
traveling by car to (or from) mission hotspots. These lulls in gameplay are
thus used to convey story in an unintrusive manner.
• Ambient actions: NPC reactions to the player not directed directly at the
player and/or not directly affecting gameplay, for example cheers and rants as
well as visible NPC-NPC interaction. This too could be interpreted as scripted
sequences, but is quite different in its implementation. Ambient actions are
rather implemented as an AI system governing NPC actions and reactions.
Example: In Just Cause, firefights erupt between the guerilla and the army
when troops from these warring factions come too close to each other.
5
As the computer games medium matures, we will perhaps see more narrative tools emerge.
37
• Character development: The aging, growth, changed looks and improved
skills of the main character, preferably dependent on player choices. Admittedly, the distinction of what is character development in this sense is blurred
somewhat; picking up a weapon could be seen as improving a skill (killing),
but has very limited narrative potential. An interesting implementation of
character development is to let narrative sequences carry over into the gameplay by showing consequences of the sequence on the main character (e g
letting an FMV showing the main character suffer a head injury result in
him carrying an eye patch for the rest of the game). Example: Eating too
much fast food in GTA: San Andreas makes the main character gain weight,
eventually becoming obese.
• Location evolvement: The changing and evolvement of visited locations
and environments returned to, meaning a changing of the looks (and possibly
also the gameplay possibilities) of parts of the game arena. Example: The
idyllic village that Fable starts in. A little further into the game the player
returns to the same village, but it now looks completely different as it is
burning and under attack by bandits.
• Interactive dialogue: Text and/or voice dialogue, traditionally where the
player chooses from a set number of different text lines to interact vocally
with NPCs. This makes an interesting combination of narrative text from
the NPC and player choice in what to reply. Example: A simple type of
interactive dialogue is present in Fable, where the player can answer “yes” or
“no” to NPC questions by pressing a button.
• Storytelling items: Journals, notes, books, TVs and other items bearing
narrative content that can be found in the game world (and often picked up)
by the main character and read, viewed or listened to by the player, at the
player’s own discretion. Example: In Fable, there are a number of books that
can be found and read (or sold) by the player. These contain much information
that helps in bringing the game world to life and providing back story.
• Player journal: An automatic player journal that is recording the events
as they happen in the game. The journal often includes notes on the main
character’s feelings and thoughts as well, making it unique. The journal also
takes a unique position on the edge between game and real world, being an
item carried by the main character in the game world as well as an interface aid
for the player. Example: In Fable, there is an in-game menu mainly featuring
gameplay tips and information about how the game world works. Under the
headline “story” there is an integrated journal telling the story so far in short
segments in first person, as if told by the main character.
• Plain text: Storytelling through the displaying of pure narrative text, often
displayed in a text-box overlaying the gameplay area on screen. Since a few
years ago, plain narrative text is seldomly displayed without being read aloud
38
to the player. Example: Plain text is used sparsely in Gun to great effect. On
a few occasions, text screens lending design from the old silent movies appear,
containing only a couple of key sentences rich with narrative content.
This list is the answer to the first task of this thesis; identifying the methods or
tools that are used to tell stories in games. When looking at the four games played,
significant differences in the number of tools used can be seen, with the RPG game
Fable using all of them but one and the more arcade-like action game Just Cause
utilising only four. (See table 4.1) This is explored further in the next chapter.
Tool
Pre-rendered video
In-game cutscenes
Scripted sequences
Voice-over
Ambient actions
Character development
Location evolvement
Interactive dialogue
Story-telling items
Player journal
Plain text
Fable
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
GTA:SA
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Gun
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Just Cause
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Table 4.1. The utilisation of narrative tools in the games played.
This chapter has covered the first two tasks presented in chapter one. First,
determining in what ways story can contribute to games generally, finding four
advantages of storytelling in games. Secondly, defining the tools available for implementing stories in games.
Now that the advantages of stories in games have been determined and the tools
available to reach them have been defined, we have the means necessary to attack
the final, hardest and most interesting task: To investigate in what ways the tools
can be used to forge story and gameplay together and to maximise the positive
effects of story. I will go about this by first taking a more in-depth look at the
eleven tools, discussing the capabilities and disadvantages of each. I then go on to
discussing their use together and the special considerations that the current genre
brings.
39
Chapter 5
Analysis
Game developers and game researchers seem to agree that a story well-tied to
gameplay is not only desirable – it is rather considered mandatory. For example, Eladhari[7] writes: “In a really good story driven game one cannot, as I see
it, separate story and gameplay.” Freeman[12] has a similar point of view: “Do
the mechanics and gameplay in your game feel like they’re an extension of your
characters or story? Do they echo the theme or themes of your story? That’s the
ideal.” As both Eladhari’s and Freeman’s words suggest, tying story and gameplay
together is a great challenge. In this chapter, some ideas on how to do this better
are presented.
First we will go on to a more in-depth look at the eleven tools identified previously and present some more examples and considerations on their use. Finally, I
will investigate how the tools can work to create a strong bond between gameplay
and story in the current genre and try to come to some conclusions on how they
can be used together in a Just Cause-like game.
5.1
The Eleven Tools
To achieve the advantages listed in the previous chapter, game developers have
eleven tools at their disposal. (First listed and defined in chapter four.) Here, we
take a look at the strengths and weaknesses of each tool and further discuss and
analyse them.
Before we go into details about each tool, it should be mentioned that tools
or game features that can not bring developer-created story forward might still be
considered having storytelling capabilities. This is because they facilitate the telling
of player-created story. These do change the way the story of the playing of the
game unfolds, but they do not affect the developer-created story. Therefore they
fall outside this listing, as they can’t create ties between story and gameplay if they
can’t in some way relate to the actual developer-created story. Examples of such
features in games are character customisation and choices in how to accomplish a
mission (this last kind of choices is abundant in Just Cause).
40
5.1.1
Pre-Rendered Video
Pre-rendered video pauses gameplay and, as it is recorded prior to the play session,
cannot display play session-specific things, such as the main characters clothes or
looks, or even the correct time of day.1 This makes this tool virtually useless in the
enhancing of player-created story, while all the dramaturgical tools of cinema are
available to tell developer-created story. As the video is not made inside the game
engine, there is also a large measure of freedom in what to show and how to show
it.
With no way of allowing the player to influence the scene and no means of conveying accurate (play session-specific) details, the only way in which pre-rendered
video can be said to help in the tying of story and gameplay together is in the
choice of when the scene is to be played. For example, a well-made FMV showing
the positive outcome of a mission just finished (the villain’s bunker going up in
flames for instance) can add a pleasant feeling of accomplishment and adds to the
sense of meaning of the mission. This aspect of timing the use of the tool applies
to all the tools however, making it the minimum level of connection.
Finally, the pre-rendered video is the most resource-heavy of all the tools, as
each graphical sequence has to be made virtually from scratch.
5.1.2
In-Game Cutscenes
The in-game cutscene mirrors the pre-rendered video in many respects. The important difference is that the in-game cutscene is made entirely in the game engine,
providing some advantages and disadvantages. The most important advantage is
that play-specific details can be shown. The actual main character chosen, outfitted
or developed by the player, locations blown up or altered in some other way and the
weather and time of day can all be displayed correctly, adding coherence between
the developer-created story told and the actual play session.
On the other hand, we are limited by the game engine’s constraints and cannot
show things that haven’t been included as assets in the game. Another disadvantage
(that is rapidly disappearing as the hardware gets better and better) is the difference
in quality – game engines generally provide a much lower graphical quality than prerendered video. It should be added that the in game cutscene requires much less
work than pre-rendered video, however.
One risk with in-game cutscenes and pre-rendered videos is that the player’s
sense of agency is contested or, in the worst case, lost altogether. Taking away
the very means of which the player can act in the game world (the controlling of
the character) is not all – the actual showing of the main character in the scene
represents a drastic shift in point of view, especially in first-person games. This shift
in views is a familiar problem among writers and an error that is common among
beginners.[27] The same goes for games: being forced to look on from the sideline
1
With a smartly limited number of choices, several FMVs could be recorded and the one most
appropriate shown to the player. However, this is quite obviously a less than ideal method.
41
as the character you have been used to be in control of acts and speaks beyond
your control can ruin much of the immersion and sense of agency. This problem
and suggested solutions are discussed in Jeff Noyle’s article Techniques of Written
Storytelling Applied to Game Design.[27]
5.1.3
Scripted Sequences
The scripted sequence represents yet another step away from pre-rendered video.
My distinction between scripted sequences and in-game cutscenes is that the player
retains control over his character in the scripted sequence. This would also mean
that the game GUI remains visible during a scripted sequence. The most important
consequence of this is that the gameflow and the immersion it brings are not interrupted in the same way as in an in-game cutscene or FMV. This makes the scripted
sequence optimal in tying story and gameplay together as it allows gameplay to go
on at the same time as storytelling. It is not optimal for telling vital bits of the
plot however, as the freedom for players to act makes it unlikely that they manage
to catch everything. This is also a reason for not having too much going on in the
background when a scripted sequence with narrative content is played.
5.1.4
Voice-over
The voice-over tool is somewhat adjacent to the scripted sequence. As far as developers are concerned, the playing of a voice clip as the player reaches a certain
location or time is in fact a scripted sequence. For the purpose of this thesis, and
also in the eyes of the player, a distinction can be made though. The voice-over
tool is then defined as a voice-over conveying narrative content not affecting or inhibiting gameplay. This tool is even weaker than the scripted sequence in ensuring
that the narrative content actually reaches the player and is therefore best used to
tell non-vital content. This could be atmosphere-enhancing things like the views,
comments and thoughts of important NPC characters accompanying the player or
voices from before that echoes in the main character’s mind as he approaches a new
challenge.
In short, the voice-over tool is a comparatively cheap and easy way of enhancing
the atmosphere or mood of a game and to add richness and depth to characters and
story.
5.1.5
Ambient Actions
Ambient actions are used to some extent in Fable and Just Cause. They could be
divided into two domains: interaction occurring between factions or people (NPCs)
regardless of the main character and interaction occurring between NPCs as a reaction to the main character or his actions, with the former mainly occurring in Just
Cause and the latter in Fable.
Actions in the first sphere are used to bring life to the game world. In Just
Cause, this is experienced as firefights erupting between guerillas and government
42
troops, sometimes with the player finding himself in the middle. This kind of
interaction going on between NPCs can be built on infinitely. One extreme is the
NPC interaction in the interactive storytelling system (the “Storytron”, formerly
known as the “Erasmatron”) being developed by Chris Crawford. Here, the NPCs
all have individual attributes and attitudes toward each other, allowing complex
interaction without involvement from the player. Spreading of rumors, news and
lies, fights starting and alliances and friendships formed are all potentially possible
in this complex system.[4] Even with less resources, much can be done in this area
to bring more life to the game world.
In the second sphere, ambient actions take the role of the third part, that of the
chorus in the ancient drama. The task of the chorus is to be the backdrop against
which the actions of the drama occurs, and also to be the audience’s emotional agent
on the scene.[5] In cinema, shots of bystanders’ or supporting characters’ faces and
their reactions to an event fill this role. For example, if the hero does something
astonishing, such as defeating the evil baron, we would see shots of surprised and
happy villagers witnessing the event. This reaction is a very strong tool for eliciting
audience emotion. Translated to the games medium, this can be done through
allowing less important NPCs (bystanders, villagers etc) to react to the player’s
actions directed at his antagonists. (Or the antagonists’ actions against the main
character.) For example, when walking past peasants in Fable, the player can often
hear them talk about him using his current hero title (which is “Chicken-chaser” in
the beginning of the game, making players want to gain a new title as quickly as
possible).
Because of their nature of not directly involving the player, ambient actions
aren’t suitable for advancing plot or conveying important information. On the
other hand they are extremely useful for bringing life and credibility to the game
world and story and especially its ties to gameplay and player actions.
5.1.6
Character Development
Character development is first and foremost seen as a gameplay feature rather than
a storytelling tool, and rightly so. The training of vital skills and increasing of
attributes belongs in any RPG, and appears with increased frequency also in games
belonging more to the adventure and action genres. An interesting example of this
in the action genre is the large amount of ways in which players can train and
improve their skills in GTA: San Andreas. What seems to be less obvious is that
character development can also be tied to the game’s story, thereby creating an
interesting connection between player-created story and gameplay on one hand and
developer-created story on the other. This is done by letting important events and
turning points in the story reflect on the main character. (For example an accident
dismembering the main character, or, as seen in Fable, visual scarring appearing as
he lives through combat.)
I am reluctant to include pure aestethic character customisation here as it can’t
actually bring a story forward, even though it does add to the immersion in the
43
game world and the player-character bond.
5.1.7
Location Evolvement
Location evolvement is a surprisingly potent tool. The immersive power of location
evolvement in sandbox gameplay is taken advantage of to some extent in a few recent
games and more so in many of the coming generation of games. It is being recognised
that a destructible environment allows deeper gameplay than just fighting a few
selected enemies in pre-determined surroundings.2
Also in story-driven gameplay, location evolvement has an important role. One
direct way of using it to bring a story forward has an example in Fable. As mentioned
above, early in the game, the player returns to a picturesque village that is now
going up in flames. This shows that things are actually happening with the world,
rather than it being just a stage on which the game is played. This creates a strong
sense of agency because you, as a player, get the feeling that you are not just a
visitor in an unchanging environment, you are an actor in a changeable world that
is responding to your actions. Manipulating the environment is thus a powerful
way of conveying story without inhibiting gameplay or forcing player attention. Its
usefulness becomes even larger in that it creates a bond between the game arena
that the gameplay takes place in and the developer-story and game world.
5.1.8
Interactive Dialogue
Interactive dialogue is one of the oldest and most primitive concepts of interactive
storytelling and also a well-used feature in games. One of its main flaws is that it
makes the branching points of the story tree painfully obvious, allowing the player
to see the exact structure of the choice tree as he goes along. It does however
represent an easy and straightforward tool for presenting players with clear and
unambiguous choices. As an example, this is seen in Fable, where the player choices
are limited to simple “yes” or “no” answers but are offering a quick and easy way
to accept or turn down missions and offers made by NPCs.
Traditionally, interactive dialogue has had the form of NPC lines being presented
as text with two or more text replies for the player to choose from. There are also
other, more modern variations in interactive dialogue, one example being the system
used in Kingpin. Here, no text alternatives to choose from are displayed. Instead,
the player chooses a more or less aggressive mode of interaction with a button press,
eliciting more or less friendly reactions from the targeted NPC.
In coming games, we see further development in interactive dialogue, using full
audio conversation with nature-like NPC facial expressions reacting to the conversation as it goes along. Even with these cosmetic developments the underlying
structure of interactive dialogue stays the same though, with the same strengths
and limitations as before.
2
I have never heard the term constructible environment on the other hand, perhaps telling us
something about the destructive nature of current games.
44
5.1.9
Storytelling Items
Storytelling items are a good way of enhancing the mood and atmosphere in a game,
tying the environment to the storyline. Another advantage is the freedom of choice
they bring. Instead of forcing the player to watch or read the developer-created
story, storytelling items can be read or viewed at any time, several times or not at all.
This makes them ideal in supplying back story and deeper non-critical knowledge
about the game world. The player more interested in story and atmosphere can
choose to access the items, while those more interested in action-oriented gameplay
can choose not do get bogged down in storytelling. As with other tools which are
optional for the player to use, those parts critical to the story’s advancement or for
the player to understand what happens should be avoided here. Storytelling items
could on the other hand be used as important tools in gameplay challenges. Because
of them being part of the game world and also being optional to use, they are good
places to hide clues to puzzles and secrets in the game, making them somewhat
useful in the tying together of story and gameplay.
The fact that the storytelling items exist inside the game world rather than
being external sources relating information about the game world from outside of it
give them a special position in the area of immersion. For example, a wooden sign
by the road saying “Danger! Here be wolves!” does more for the immersion than a
text popup saying “Entering wolf level”.
5.1.10
Player Journal
The player journal is not only a storytelling tool, but can also be an important aid
to the player, recording events as they happen and working as a reference where the
player can look up mission objectives and the history of his instance of the game.
As a logical limitation, player journals can’t hold information that drives the story
forward. They are after all journals, being records of events already happened.
What they often are used for on the other hand is to convey the main character’s
emotions and his reflections and thoughts about the events as they happen in the
game. This brings another dimension of storytelling that is omnipresent in literature
but is harder to convey in film (and thereby in in-game cutscenes and FMVs).
The player journal could be seen as a special instance of storytelling items –
being an item which contents are created by the main character. One important
difference apart from the player journal’s special position as a record of the main
character’s emotions is its capability to contain out-of game world information. This
can be mission objectives or other game-related information that lies on the border
between gameplay mechanics and game world.
5.1.11
Plain Text
Plain text is the oldest tool, familiar already in the old MUDs of the seventies and
eighties, although nowadays it is more often than not combined with a voice-over
reading the text aloud. This combination of voice-over and text are powerful to
45
get a point across, but they quickly grow tedious if the text volume gets too large.
Reading long texts on-screen is strenuous to the eyes, and the voice-over reading
of long texts demands much time. Players also tend to expect more than a text
screen when they have accomplished a mission or enter a new part of the game. An
example of where text screens work is the silent film-inspired screens used in Gun.
The creators of the game have the voice of the main character read the text and
have also made an effort to make it short – in most cases there is only a couple of
sentences.
Instead of interrupting gameplay like in many older games, narrative text can be
presented where is doesn’t interference with ongoing events. One obvious such place
is loading screens of different kinds. These are often used for displaying gameplay
tips, and in some games (such as Rome: Total War) they show famous quotes.
Displaying short paragraphs of narrative text is a however a viable option here.
5.2
Using the Tools Together
We saw in chapter four (see table 4.1) that the games played utilise quite different
combinations of the tools. Fable uses most of them and GTA: San Andreas a little
fewer. Gun relies mainly on a cinematic storytelling with scripted sequences and
in-game cutscenes and uses even fewer. Finally, Just Cause is the game with the
least significant story component, which is indicated by the game utilising only four
tools.
The number of tools used is of course not all that matters. As Magnus Nedfors,
lead designer at Avalanche Studios points out: “It’s the quality that’s important –
even if we manage to include all of the tools it’s worth nothing if we don’t do it
well.”3 This is in line with the main point of immersion: That it is not how much
good stuff you successfully include that matters, it is that you avoid the mistakes
and errors disturbing the immersive experience. An example of this is the comments
from bystanders that the player hears when passing through villages in Fable. It
is at first enhancing the feeling of a living world and also helps establishing that
the main character is an aspiring hero struggling to become renown. As the game
progresses the comments quickly become repetitive and instead serve as a disturbing
element detrimental to the sense of immersion. GTA: San Andreas, unlike Fable, is
not called an RPG but still has much of the same gameplay components and plays
much in the same way. Here, the tools are however used better and aren’t allowed to
disturb the experience in the same way. The high quality and large scope of GTA:
San Andreas’ story shows that an action game’s story component can now actually
compete with traditionally story-heavier games. Consequently, GTA: San Andreas
has received higher scores and better press, both for the game as a whole and for the
story. This is interesting as Fable, being an RPG, traditionally would be expected
to have more development time dedicated to the story and its implementation, and
more weight on it in the game.
3
From a round-table discussion at Avalanche Studios.
46
As the tools are radically different, they form a highly complex system. With
each tool having its distinct advantages and disadvantages, it is not simply a matter
of including as many tools as possible, or even which tools to use. It is about how
to use them and, more importantly, how to combine them for greatest possible
effect. One example of a combination of tools is using pre-rendered videos, in-game
cutscenes or even recorded gameplay events in the player journal. Letting the player
revisit cutscenes ensures that no important information has been missed, and doing
it from within the player journal makes it more connected to other events recorded
in the journal and lets it happen inside the game and game world. Another example,
that has been mentioned earlier, is letting the main character be affected by events
conveyed in a cutscene. (A character development/in-game cutscene or character
development/pre-rendered video combination.)
Forming rules about how to combine the tools is perhaps not impossible, but
it would be far too complex to investigate in depth here. However, being aware of
each tool’s limitations and strengths is vital for making informed choices in how to
use the story for maximum advantage. An important consideration in this respect
is how strong the tools are in conveying developer-created story versus facilitating
player-created story. A graphical representation of this, somewhat summarising the
above sections, can be found in figure 5.1, though the positions here aren’t exact and
also somewhat subjective by nature. In the top left we see pre-rendered video and
in-game cutscenes. In essence being movie clips, they are very strong in advancing
a plot, but have a weakness in the areas of player involvement and connection
to gameplay. Scoring high on both axes are scripted sequences and interactive
dialogue, being strong in conveying developer-created story as well as having a high
level of interactivity – forming gameplay elements in themselves. Ambient actions
and character development are weakest in conveying developer-created story and
are in the bottom right of the figure. The rest of the tools occupy middle positions,
with voice-over and plain text being weakest in player-created story, as they are not
as closely tied to, or affected by, player actions.
5.2.1
Tying Story to Gameplay
When looking to tie story and gameplay together to form one coherent experience
rather than focusing on the actual telling of the story, another set of tools come
into focus. Some are strong means of forging the different parts of a game together,
while others almost work in the opposite direction. These differences somewhat
resemble those of player-created versus developer-created story brought up in the
previous section, with pre-rendered video being the weakest tool here. Pre-rendered
videos are (as the name suggests) completed before the release of the game, making
it impossible to adapt to a specific play session or incorporate any player choices
made. Locking user input and reducing the active player to a spectator, the prerendered videos show pre-determined scenes uncapable of relating to player choices
47
Figure 5.1. The strength of the storytelling tools in telling developer-created vs
player-created story. A high rating in both (i.e. a position in the top right corner)
means that the tool is strong in tying story to gameplay.
or the state of the game world.
Second weakest are the in-game cutscenes and plain text. Identical to the prerendered video in most respects, in-game cutscenes have one important advantage
and an (increasingly insignificant) disadvantage. The advantage is that it is possible
to get many details right, for example those mentioned above, bringing at least some
measure of coherence between story and gameplay. The same is true for plain text,
where player-specific information can easily be pasted into the text, somewhat tying
it to the current play session. These tools are however also working negatively here,
as they (as well as pre-rendered video) lock user input and put the player in the
backseat. The disadvantage of in-game cutscenes is the graphics quality. The prerendered videos have virtually no upper limit in how high the quality can be, while
the in-game cutscenes are dependent on the game engine and are limited by its
capabilities. With the increasing power of the hardware, this problem is however
rapidly diminishing.
Then comes a few tools that can better be used to help shaping a coherent
experience. Storytelling items, ambient actions, player journal, voice-over, character
development and location evolvement are all narrative tools that exist within the
game world. These might not be the most important as they more often than not
require little or no input from the player, and merely coexist with the main character
in the game world. Used together they do have potential to form a strong bond
48
between story and gameplay, bringing story references into every corner of the game
world.
What I consider best are scripted sequences and interactive dialogue, because
they form actual gameplay elements in themselves. This allows the player to actually
play the story forward and is the closest we get to pure interactive storytelling. The
versatility of the scripted sequence makes it particularly interesting. A modern
interactive dialogue system that works really well is on the other hand yet to be
seen, although some titles of the 2006 edition of E3 look promising.
To summarise the above section, the usefulness of the tools when tying story to
gameplay is shown in figure 5.2. As we can see here, the scripted sequences and
interactive dialogue tools are in the top. This is because they allow gameplay and
narrative simultaneously, which (as one can imagine) is the best possible position
in tying gameplay and story together. Then follows a group of tools that are weak
in advancing plot but add much to the atmosphere and play area of a game. These
help in making the play area feel like a living world where the game’s story is an
integrated part. In the lowest positions are the tools that halt gameplay and disrupt
the feeling of agency. The tool getting the bottom position here is pre-rendered
video, as it can’t be affected by how the game has been played at all.
Figure 5.2. The tools’ suitability for tying story to gameplay. The tools that get a
high rating here are those that are positioned in the top right corner of figure 5.1.
49
5.3
Implementing Story in the Action-Arcade Genre
As we have discussed in chapter one, different game genres demand radically different approaches to storytelling. Looking at a game in the action-arcade genre
(like Just Cause) some considerations come to mind. Firstly, one could assume that
players don’t expect very much weight on story in this genre. The story component
getting a minor amount of player time and attention for the sake of action-oriented
gameplay gives us a certain base layout to work with.
While the ideal of course is a great story giving us as much as possible in
all four areas mentioned – immersion, cohesiveness, motivation and storytelling
in itself – limitations in development time force prioritising of resources. With
these limitations in mind, we can speculate that it is less attractive to go for the
“immersion”4 and “storytelling for its own sake” benefits, while we can still achieve
plenty in the cohesiveness area, as well as increasing motivation. With a minimum
of narrative sequences we can still put the main character and his or her objectives
in a context and provide the player with reasons for performing the tasks given.
Creating a strong sense of immersion and a strong story that is an experience in
itself is a true challenge with these constraints, why it is more sensible to try to
reach these objectives using the player-created story.
So what we have in this genre is a situation where we want to focus on working
with facilitating the player-created story to create immersion and motivation, and
let our (less heavy) developer-created story go for cohesiveness and also increasing
motivation.
We don’t want to disrupt gameplay and force players away from controlling their
character, thus we need to avoid too many long cutscenes or other non-interactive
narrative sequences. As the two tools that are easiest for telling story (pre-rendered
video and in-game cutscenes) do exactly this, we have a situation where we have
little tools to convey a developer-created story. This makes the tools strong in
tying together story and gameplay more important, as well as those tools making
it optional to take part of the narrative content. Thus, for the action-game, the
scripted sequence is optimal for telling story as the game goes along, while we can
still use pre-rendered video or in-game cutscenes for intro and outro and perhaps
also when the player starts and finishes major chapters and we actually seek the
slump in pace they bring.
To bring more depth to the storyline and characters, the tools that don’t force
away players from the action are most useful. This lets people play the games in the
manner they want, whether they want to follow every detail in the story or choose
to focus on the actual playing. These tools are player journal and storytelling items.
One should notice that the work on these might be wasted as many action-oriented
players won’t bother much with them.
In conclusion, very much can be done even with a less than perfect story if it is
4
Immersion is of course extremely important. In this genre, resources are however perhaps
better spent on creating a sense of immersion from the game world and the gameplay itself rather
than relying too much on the story here.
50
told using each tool to its maximum advantage. Rather than looking at the story
of games in the same way as John Carmack – that it has the same (non-existent)
role as story in porn movies – I would argue that stories in action games have the
role of those in horror movies. In these, nobody expects the high quality stories of
drama movies having immensely gripping storylines and vivid character portraits.
The generic horror story does however add coherence between the horror scenes and
a measure of sympathy for the characters. Here, a rather simple story with not too
much work on it adds some vital qualities to the experience, just like it can in any
action game.
5.4
Conclusions and Future Work
In the thesis section of the first chapter, three tasks were defined:
1. Define in what ways the story can contribute to a game in the current genre
2. Identify the methods or tools that are used to tell stories in games
3. Investigate in what ways these methods or tools can be used to forge story
and gameplay together and to maximise the positive effects found in (1).
The first task above was presented as a foundation for the sections on the games
played. Here, the four benefits of storytelling in games were outlined, and three of
them were identified as being relevant for the relationship between gameplay and
story: cohesiveness, immersion and motivation.
The second task was then addressed. Here, four AAA action games that include
both a significant story component and sandbox gameplay were played thoroughly.
The storytelling in these games acted as the source for defining eleven storytelling
tools used in the games medium. These eleven tools are not entirely separate, but
are sometimes adjacent and even overlapping. In addition to defining the set of
tools, I have also discussed the advantages, disadvantages and complications that
each tool brings.
These two sets of results form a logical foundation for discussing storytelling
in games further. I have argued that they are not the only things to consider
however: the genre is highly important as well. In the choice of how to tell story
and what storytelling tools to utilise and in what manner, one must bear in mind
what expectations and limitations the genre brings. (With genre boundaries being
vague and cross-genre games frequently being developed, the phrasing “type of
game” is perhaps more appropriate than “genre”.)
Finally, I have discussed how one can use the tools together to maximise the
positive effects of story. I have here tried to forge the results and previous analysis
together into a coherent discussion. The topic of what effect different combinations
of tools can have has proven to be almost a science in itself, so my discussion on this
is limited to merely being a few short suggestions. The large number of storytelling
tools available and the number of different advantages to be gained from them makes
51
storytelling in the computer games medium extremely complex. This is a large and
complex area to say the least, and could be expanded upon considerably. Forming
systems and rules for it will prove to be extremely difficult, but the advantages of
a methodological approach to storytelling in games could be tremendous. In short,
much more can be done in the researching of how to best use the tools in different
genres, to different effects and in different combinations. Further thought could also
be put into the delimitation between the tools as they overlap each other somewhat
with my distinctions. (Scripted sequences could for example be designed to not
directly affect the player and thus be perceived as ambient actions.)
Where future developments really get interesting is when we can successfully
abandon the now dominant method of combining story-free sandbox gameplay with
linear story-driven missions. The next step is to combine the two into sandbox
gameplay that has impact on a multi-linear or (in the ideal world) a non-linear
story. This is the largest and most promising challenge in the future of the games
medium – to combine player-created story with developer-created story and give
rise to real interactive storytelling.
52
Bibliography
[1]
E. Aarseth. Playing research: Methodological approaches to game analysis. In Digital
Arts and Culture (DAC) 2003 Streaming Wor(l)ds Conference Proceedings, 2003.
[2]
E. Adams. How many endings does a game need? URL http://www.gamasutra.com/
features/20041222/adams_01.shtml. Date of access: 20060508.
[3]
The american heritage® dictionary of the english language, 2000. URL http://www.
bartleby.com/61/79/I0047900.html. Date of access: Feb 17th, 2006.
[4]
C. Crawford. On Interactive Storytelling. New Riders, 2005. ISBN 0-321-27890-9.
[5]
M. Ödeen. Dramatiskt Berättande. Carlsson, 1988. ISBN 91-7203-729-6.
[6]
A. Rollings E. Adams. Andrew Rollings and Ernest Adams on Game Design. New
Riders, 2003. ISBN 1592730019.
[7]
M. Eladhari. Object oriented story construction in story driven computer games.
Master’s thesis, University of Stockholm, 2002.
[8]
Entertainment software association. URL http://www.theesa.com/facts/gamer_
data.php. Date of access: May 18th, 2006.
[9]
Pagulayan et al. User-centered design in games. In A. Sears J. Jacko, editor, Handbook for Human-Computer Interaction in Interactive Systems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 2003.
[10] C. Faulkner. The Essence of Human - Computer Interaction. Prentice Hall, 1998.
ISBN 0-13-751975-3.
[11] G. Frasca. Ludologists love stories, too: notes from a debate that never took place. In
LevelUp 2003 Conference, 2003.
[12] D. Freeman. Creating Emotion in Games: The Craft and Art of Emotioneering. New
Riders, 2003. ISBN 1-5927-3007-8.
[13] Gamespot. URL http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/grandtheftauto3/index.
html?q=grand%20theft%20auto%203. Date of access: Feb 14th, 2006.
[14] P. Gander. Two myths about immersion in new storytelling media. Lund University
Cognitive Studies 80, 1999.
[15] Grand text auto: A group blog about computer narrative, games, poetry, and art.
URL http://grandtextauto.gatech.edu/2003/08/06/interaction-and-agency/.
Date of access: May 18th, 2006.
53
[16] A. Gustafsson. Digital narrativitet: En analys av zeldas utveckling som berättande
medietext. Linköping University, Campus Norrköping, 2002.
[17] B. Brown C. Gutwin J. Dyck, D. Pinelle. Learning from games: HCI design innovations
in entertainment software. In Proc. 2003 Conf. On Graphics Interface (GI’03), Halifax,
2003.
[18] H. Jenkins. Game design as narrative architecture. In P. Harrigan N. Wardrip-Fruin,
editor, First Person : New Media as Story, Performance, and Game. Cambridge: MIT
Press, 2004.
[19] A. H. Jörgensen. Marrying hci/usability and computer games: A preliminary look. In
NordiCHI ’04, October 23-27, Tampere, Finland, 2004.
[20] J. Juul. A clash between game and narrative: A thesis on computer games and interactive fiction. University of Copenhagen, 1999.
[21] J. Juul. Games telling stories? Game Studies Journal, July 2001.
[22] L. Konzack. Computer game criticism: A method for computer game analysis. In
CGDC Conference Proceedings, Frans Mayra (ed.), Tampere University Press, pages
89–100, 2002.
[23] N. Lazarro. Why we play games: Four keys to more emotion without story. XEODesign
Inc., 2005.
[24] A. Light. Narrative vs control in the online story world. URL http://www.uigarden.
net/english/narrative-vs-control-in-the-online-story-world. Date of access: Apr 5th, 2006.
[25] M. S. Meadows. Pause & Effect: The Art of Interactive Narrative. New Riders, 2002.
ISBN 0735711712.
[26] J. Murray. Hamlet on the Holodeck - The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. MIT
Press, 1998. ISBN 0262631873.
[27] J. Noyle. Techniques of written storytelling applied to game design. URL http:
//www.gamasutra.com/features/20060426/noyle_01.shtml. Date of access: May
15th, 2006.
[28] J. A. Ward. Interactive narrative theory and practice. James Madison University,
2004.
54
Appendices
55
Appendix A
Ludography
Call of Duty Activision Publishing Inc., Infinity Ward Inc., 2003
Fable Microsoft Game Studios, Lionhead Studios Ltd., 2004
Fahrenheit (Indigo Prophecy) Atari Europe S.A.S.U, Quantic Dream, 2005
Grand Theft Auto III Rockstar Games Inc., Rockstar North Ltd., 2002
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Rockstar Games Inc., Rockstar North Ltd., 2004
Gun Activision Publishing Inc., Neversoft Entertainment, 2005
Halo: Combat Evolved Microsoft Game Studios, Bungie Software Products Corporation, 2001
Ico Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc., Sony Computer Entertainment Inc., 2001
Just Cause Eidos, Avalanche Studios, 2006
Kingpin: Life of Crime Interplay Entertainment Corp., Xatrix Entertainment, Inc., 1999
Max Payne Rockstar Games Inc., Remedy Entertainment Ltd., 2001
Missile Command Midway Games West Inc., Midway Games West Inc., 1981
Pac-Man Atari, Namco Ltd., 1981
Rome: Total War Activision Publishing Inc., The Creative Assembly, 2004
Shadow of the Colossus Sony Computer Entertainment Europe, Ltd., Sony Computer
Entertainment Inc., 2006
Shenmue SEGA Corp., SEGA-AM2 Co. Ltd., 1999
The Legend of Zelda Nintendo Co. Ltd., Nintendo Co. Ltd., 1986
Game information taken from http://www.mobygames.com
56
Appendix B
Glossary
AAA: Triple-A rating. Originally used as a credit rating, AAA is also used in the
entertainment business to denote a top-notch game with a substantial budget
(as opposed to budget, value or B-titles).
E3: Electronic Entertainment Expo. The world’s largest computer games venue,
that was held in Los Angeles in May each year. Here, the game companies
spent countless dollars in their struggle to outperform their competition in
presenting their coming (always next-gen) titles. Currently, the future of E3
is uncertain.
FMV: Full-Motion Video. A short video clip often shown at important moments
and turning points in a game. Used to piece out bits of story. Here, it is used
interchangeably with pre-rendered video.
FPS: First-person shooter. An action game where the player sees the game world
as if through the main character’s eyes.
GUI: Graphical User Interface. This is the button and information panels overlaid
on the game area, showing vital information to the player, such as weapons
used, items carried, available maps and the state of the main character.
main character (MC): The game character that has the main role in the story
and is controlled by the player.
MUD: Multi-User Dungeon. Exclusively text-based multiplayer adventure games
creating strong communities in the early days of computer gaming. The predecessor to todays graphical-interface massively multiplayer RPGs.
NPC: Non-Playable Character, all the characters in a game that are not controlled
by a human player.
RPG: Role-playing game. In this thesis this means computer RPGs, sometimes
called CRPGs. These lend from the traditional, non-computerised, role57
playing games, and are largely about evolving a character while exploring
some kind of fantasy world.
ship a game: Delivering the finished game (code and assets) to the distributor
for the manufacturing of the actual game discs/cartridges.
sandbox gameplay: A free mode of gameplay letting the player roam freely and
engage in whatever activities he wants. The opposite of linear gameplay, where
the player has to complete a linear series of developer-defined tasks often tied
closely to the game’s story. Well-known titles including a large component of
sandbox gameplay are the GTA series and Just Cause.
58
TRITA-CSC-E 2007: 001
ISRN-KTH/CSC/E--07/001--SE
ISSN-1653-5715
www.kth.se