I think games can be thought of as the next step after movies/books because even with the added element of interactivity, there is still a guiding hand behind the work. It's the same mistake Ebert makes when he says that games will never be high art due to interactivity. Even though the player feels like they are making the story into their own, the developer is always in control of what the player can/can't do.The Random One said:
236: The Stories We Tell Ourselves
- Thread starter Dietrich Stogner
- Start date
I almost agreed, especially as I empathised with the writer's parents denying him a console - happened to me too, although that instead led me to a life loving computer games instead, from the Amiga to the PC. And besides, all my friends had them, so I still played a hell of a lot of console games!
The main thing I take issue with is this bit:
The main thing I take issue with is this bit:
Um, no, we're not. It's always been like this, and there is a 'single player games are on their way out' argument every year. Is God of War 3 multiplayer driven? Grand Theft Auto 4? Bioshock 2? Deus Ex 3? Batman: Arkham Asylum? No. Are we suddenly seeing a time where single-player games are ignored for the multiplayer component in them? No. Super Mario Kart. GoldenEye. Quake II. There are always games like this.
Thank you Sewblon, I was going to mention that one too. Play it then revise your opinion, Mr Stogner (great name by the way).Sewblon said:
Well, I really don't click with any of what is said in this article. Humans, for as long as we have existed on this planet, have told stories, in a basically linear way, with heavy authoring. There are experiments along the way, theatre that breaks the fourth wall as is mentioned, improv, some performance artists, etc. Yet, storytelling hasn't changed all that much because there are some type of learning and cognitive functions that are really hardwired into our brains. Technology does place us in a very different place than cavemen, but I don't think we've changed that much to forgo internal storytelling in our mediums. Not yet. I'm not saying it will never happen. I just think it's way too soon to be declaring this type of communication dead.
Also, I think that there are games that have taken the language of the medium and told an internal story much better that what has been mentioned so far. I point to all the "artsy" games as evidence that multiplayer does not equal the only way for games to draw the player into a interactive narrative.
Exhibit A: Shadow of the Colossus. Strictly single player. Mute. It uses ample interactive exploration and time spent travelling, loneliness, and some very visceral gaming at the colossi to tell a rather simple, yet strangely epic story. Very similar to myths of old that can be found in a lot literature in all the ages. It makes the player feel a lot of things, even a bond to a digital animal, stronger than any multiplyer experience I have had. I would say it really takes advantege of the "language" available in a game.
Exhibit B: Flower. I think this type of games are in its infancy, but it completely embraces the fact that it's an interactive medium (the literal physical input) to guide the player through the game and convey a message. OK, so a lot of people say there's hardly any game or narrative in there at all, and I can understand that. Good narratives can be subtle too. Plus, I think demostrated that there are still words to add to our the gaming language with which we want to approach interactive narrative.
So far: rather shallow stories, no extremely complex characters, right? I'll concede that. I just think this type of games show that there are still a lof of avenues to take before we declare that external storytelling it the one and only way. I have one more thing to say:
exhibit c: Jordan Mechner's little absolute masterpiece, The Last Express. Single player experience. Pioneered the rewind function that would later be at the core of the Sands of Time trilogy. It's a game you can play many times and always experience it in a different way (dialogues you hadn't heard, alternate endings, different ways of solving a problem, etc). It is heavily scripted and authored, yet it weaves an extremely complex tale and develops multilayered characters (male and female) in a way that distances itself from book and film. If you've never played this game, it's my opinion you have no place talking about innovative narrative techniques in gaming. Plus I think it's one of those examples where style trumps graphics, as the art used is still unique and doesn't look all that aged.
EDIT: Just to add a final thought. What I feel these (and other games) share is that in all of them the gameplay actions you take are the story, and not that the actions you take in the game are way to get to or progress a somewhat removed story. That is what storytelling in game should be.
Also, I think that there are games that have taken the language of the medium and told an internal story much better that what has been mentioned so far. I point to all the "artsy" games as evidence that multiplayer does not equal the only way for games to draw the player into a interactive narrative.
Exhibit A: Shadow of the Colossus. Strictly single player. Mute. It uses ample interactive exploration and time spent travelling, loneliness, and some very visceral gaming at the colossi to tell a rather simple, yet strangely epic story. Very similar to myths of old that can be found in a lot literature in all the ages. It makes the player feel a lot of things, even a bond to a digital animal, stronger than any multiplyer experience I have had. I would say it really takes advantege of the "language" available in a game.
Exhibit B: Flower. I think this type of games are in its infancy, but it completely embraces the fact that it's an interactive medium (the literal physical input) to guide the player through the game and convey a message. OK, so a lot of people say there's hardly any game or narrative in there at all, and I can understand that. Good narratives can be subtle too. Plus, I think demostrated that there are still words to add to our the gaming language with which we want to approach interactive narrative.
So far: rather shallow stories, no extremely complex characters, right? I'll concede that. I just think this type of games show that there are still a lof of avenues to take before we declare that external storytelling it the one and only way. I have one more thing to say:
exhibit c: Jordan Mechner's little absolute masterpiece, The Last Express. Single player experience. Pioneered the rewind function that would later be at the core of the Sands of Time trilogy. It's a game you can play many times and always experience it in a different way (dialogues you hadn't heard, alternate endings, different ways of solving a problem, etc). It is heavily scripted and authored, yet it weaves an extremely complex tale and develops multilayered characters (male and female) in a way that distances itself from book and film. If you've never played this game, it's my opinion you have no place talking about innovative narrative techniques in gaming. Plus I think it's one of those examples where style trumps graphics, as the art used is still unique and doesn't look all that aged.
EDIT: Just to add a final thought. What I feel these (and other games) share is that in all of them the gameplay actions you take are the story, and not that the actions you take in the game are way to get to or progress a somewhat removed story. That is what storytelling in game should be.
These "external stories" are no replacement for a good well crafted linear story. The story of the headshot I just got or my friend finally getting that high score is nowhere near as interesting as, say, Grim Fandango's story. These are just life experiences, and maybe very good ones, but they dont' replace story.
Games don't need to all provide you with choice. Games don't all need to be sandboxes. The games that give you choice like Mass Effect just create a large number of branching storylines, but it's limited. Games like the Sims just don't tell very interesting stories, they're interesting for their gameplay.
Furthermore, if you make a game that is just a sandbox for players to create interesting stories, they won't necessarly create interesting stories. They'll do things, but not everything someone does is an interesting story. Writers pick the things that are interesting.
It's not that Mass Effect or Sims or Left 4 Dead are bad games, they just fill a different niche, and linear story based games have their own niche.
Like the article says, games can't just immitate movies, but that's not the same as games shouldn't have linear stories.
- - - - - - - -
To me, games aren't necessarily a better storyteller than movies, they're a different storyteller. A key difference is that in a game you're not just being told the story, you're earning it, and working for something and being rewarded feels good.
Games don't need to all provide you with choice. Games don't all need to be sandboxes. The games that give you choice like Mass Effect just create a large number of branching storylines, but it's limited. Games like the Sims just don't tell very interesting stories, they're interesting for their gameplay.
Furthermore, if you make a game that is just a sandbox for players to create interesting stories, they won't necessarly create interesting stories. They'll do things, but not everything someone does is an interesting story. Writers pick the things that are interesting.
It's not that Mass Effect or Sims or Left 4 Dead are bad games, they just fill a different niche, and linear story based games have their own niche.
Like the article says, games can't just immitate movies, but that's not the same as games shouldn't have linear stories.
- - - - - - - -
To me, games aren't necessarily a better storyteller than movies, they're a different storyteller. A key difference is that in a game you're not just being told the story, you're earning it, and working for something and being rewarded feels good.
The problem that i find (and after doing most of a year in basic level program design) is that computers follow the "Option 1, If not 1, Then 2, If not 2, then 3" and so on, So you get options in current gen games being "good, Neutral, bad". The thing is, I find it to be a completely different experience than reading a book.
A book can entrall you, having you hooked, and something i find is that i then start forgetting im reading, Almost like im watching TV, in my head (i tried to make that sound fancy. I failed, I know.) However, Ive never spent 200 hours reading a single book, And ive never read the same book twice (Cover to Cover) in the same month.
The thing is, You can waste hours or even Days reading books. You dont need electricity to read them ('cept maybe for light) or any internet connection. But unless you're in some kind of book club it can be a rather solitary pursuit.
Gaming on the other hand can be a solitary pursuit, but with technological advances in the last 10 years, Im willing to bet that at sometime or another nearly every gamer has played with someone else, Its basic competition. Single Player games have come on leaps & bounds in the last 5/6 years, just take Oblivion as a case point. That had a rather epic storyline, And sure, It can be fairly linear, But then again, When is a book not[/I] linear? Where does it say in harry potter that you can change the ending yourself?
If we pulled someone from the early 80's forward to now, And told him that computer games will have stories more engrossing than films, He'd probably laugh in your face,(and then apply copious amounts of hairspray), But have him play mass effect, oblivion, Or even one of the FF games, and im sure he would have a change of heart. Im quite hopeful that in the future games will become as satisfying and more engrossing than a good book.
A book can entrall you, having you hooked, and something i find is that i then start forgetting im reading, Almost like im watching TV, in my head (i tried to make that sound fancy. I failed, I know.) However, Ive never spent 200 hours reading a single book, And ive never read the same book twice (Cover to Cover) in the same month.
The thing is, You can waste hours or even Days reading books. You dont need electricity to read them ('cept maybe for light) or any internet connection. But unless you're in some kind of book club it can be a rather solitary pursuit.
Gaming on the other hand can be a solitary pursuit, but with technological advances in the last 10 years, Im willing to bet that at sometime or another nearly every gamer has played with someone else, Its basic competition. Single Player games have come on leaps & bounds in the last 5/6 years, just take Oblivion as a case point. That had a rather epic storyline, And sure, It can be fairly linear, But then again, When is a book not[/I] linear? Where does it say in harry potter that you can change the ending yourself?
If we pulled someone from the early 80's forward to now, And told him that computer games will have stories more engrossing than films, He'd probably laugh in your face,(and then apply copious amounts of hairspray), But have him play mass effect, oblivion, Or even one of the FF games, and im sure he would have a change of heart. Im quite hopeful that in the future games will become as satisfying and more engrossing than a good book.
This is an interesting idea - the focus on games as tools for collaborative storytelling in particular is fascinating.
To me, the unique narrative power of videogames is the ability to tell stories about the audience - which no other medium can pull off anywhere near as well. I wrote about this recently, and those who find the topic interesting may wish to check it out:
Play Me A Story, Part One: Metal Gear Solid and the Cinematic Game [http://www.pixelpoppers.com/2009/09/play-me-story-part-one-metal-gear-solid.html]
Play Me A Story, Part Two: What Makes A Metanarrative? [http://www.pixelpoppers.com/2009/09/play-me-story-part-two-what-makes.html]
To me, the unique narrative power of videogames is the ability to tell stories about the audience - which no other medium can pull off anywhere near as well. I wrote about this recently, and those who find the topic interesting may wish to check it out:
Play Me A Story, Part One: Metal Gear Solid and the Cinematic Game [http://www.pixelpoppers.com/2009/09/play-me-story-part-one-metal-gear-solid.html]
Play Me A Story, Part Two: What Makes A Metanarrative? [http://www.pixelpoppers.com/2009/09/play-me-story-part-two-what-makes.html]
Quote:
"No, game narratives have to be flexible and fluid, which doesn't lead to deep themes and complex plots but instead encourages simplistic tales that can adapt to digital chaos."
OOooohh boy, I wouldn't want to live in his kind of future.....Sure, sounds good the way he presents it, but damn people...look past the pretty words...look at the nasty implications.
We already don't need a valid reason to go kill off a horde of baddies. "They're evil" (look at their eyes
usually suffices. We're all on the road to becoming FEATHERBRAINED.
If this guys future sets in, we can look forward to games with no real depth: less than 8h singleplayer with no replay value and a huge focus on multiplayer....what a friggin waste of storytelling potential. This is not evolution...this is degeneration.
"No, game narratives have to be flexible and fluid, which doesn't lead to deep themes and complex plots but instead encourages simplistic tales that can adapt to digital chaos."
OOooohh boy, I wouldn't want to live in his kind of future.....Sure, sounds good the way he presents it, but damn people...look past the pretty words...look at the nasty implications.
We already don't need a valid reason to go kill off a horde of baddies. "They're evil" (look at their eyes
usually suffices. We're all on the road to becoming FEATHERBRAINED.If this guys future sets in, we can look forward to games with no real depth: less than 8h singleplayer with no replay value and a huge focus on multiplayer....what a friggin waste of storytelling potential. This is not evolution...this is degeneration.
I absolutely love strong single player narratives. Bioshock, the Half-Life series, and Shadow of the Colossus are the three games that top my list of all time, and all three are strong single player campaigns with no multiplayer to speak of. That being said, as much as I love the stories of these games, they are relatively simple, I believe necessarily so.
As for the idea that single player games are disappearing, I don't think that they ever will go away entirely, and I would be extremely upset if they did. However, sales figures from last year show fairly clearly that single player focused games are not selling as well as their multiplayer counterparts. Of the single player focused games that released last year (and there were a LOT: Arkham Asylum, Dragon Age: Origins, Assassin's Creed 2, Demon's Souls, Brutal Legend, Uncharted 2, forgive me for the countless more I'm forgetting), Assassin's Creed 2 was the only one to break the top 20 sales lists.
I don't want to say that someone who has a strong narrative to tell in a video game shouldn't do so. But I do feel that games have the opportunity to explore a completely new approach to telling stories, and this isn't something to shy away from. It took a while for filmmakers to figure out how to use this new medium to do something that was unique and unprecedented, but they eventually established the cinema as an art form all its own. Games have that same chance. This is virgin territory, and the game makers who craft strong titles that stand apart from comparisons to film or literature are the ones who will define the industry.
As for the idea that single player games are disappearing, I don't think that they ever will go away entirely, and I would be extremely upset if they did. However, sales figures from last year show fairly clearly that single player focused games are not selling as well as their multiplayer counterparts. Of the single player focused games that released last year (and there were a LOT: Arkham Asylum, Dragon Age: Origins, Assassin's Creed 2, Demon's Souls, Brutal Legend, Uncharted 2, forgive me for the countless more I'm forgetting), Assassin's Creed 2 was the only one to break the top 20 sales lists.
I don't want to say that someone who has a strong narrative to tell in a video game shouldn't do so. But I do feel that games have the opportunity to explore a completely new approach to telling stories, and this isn't something to shy away from. It took a while for filmmakers to figure out how to use this new medium to do something that was unique and unprecedented, but they eventually established the cinema as an art form all its own. Games have that same chance. This is virgin territory, and the game makers who craft strong titles that stand apart from comparisons to film or literature are the ones who will define the industry.
The differences today between good video games and good movies are blurring. The main thing that separates the two are the fact that in a good movie, or book for that matter, you have to go where the story takes you, follow it to the end, and can't diverge. We've all been at points in books and movies asking the protagonist "What the heck did you do THAT for?" They did it to serve the story. Video games offer an entirely new realm of interaction; some of today's even look better than movies out just 10 years ago. Games like Dragon Age, Fallout, Oblivion, GTA, Neverwinter Nights, Knights of the Old Republic, to name a very few, depend on your decisions to shape the story, and things go the way YOU want them to, even though someone else used the medium to created the world your character is inhabiting.
It seems to me that there is the growing thought that stories = anecdotes. It is true that an anecdote is a type of story, but I don't think anecdotes can replace the level of development and characterizations achieved in books, movies, theater, etc.
In an anecdote, where's the mystery? The intrigue? The development of an overall arch?
Omitting a story and saying "the user develops their own story through their experiences" is like omitting music and sound effects and saying "the user generates their own atmospheric sound though their playing".
In an anecdote, where's the mystery? The intrigue? The development of an overall arch?
Omitting a story and saying "the user develops their own story through their experiences" is like omitting music and sound effects and saying "the user generates their own atmospheric sound though their playing".
Well, it looks like this got us all talking, didn't it? Good stuff.
I personally find it interesting that Citizen Kane was used as the film analogy.
Jesse Schell in his book The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses has a name for the author's ideal storytelling structure: "The Story Machine." That is, a foundation for a variety of player-influenced stories. It's a legitimate storytelling scheme.
But here we have people advocating the strengths of linear storytelling, and everyone's bringing up their favorite story-driven experiences. Shadow of the Colossus, Bioshock, Half-Life, Grim Fandango - heck, I'm ready to bring up a few of my own.
None of these are Citizen Kane? In what respect? Completely universal recognition as a champion of the medium's storytelling? True, perhaps no one single game is the unchallenged champion of the industry's storytelling skill.
Actually, carelesshx says it better:
I personally find it interesting that Citizen Kane was used as the film analogy.
Jesse Schell in his book The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses has a name for the author's ideal storytelling structure: "The Story Machine." That is, a foundation for a variety of player-influenced stories. It's a legitimate storytelling scheme.
But here we have people advocating the strengths of linear storytelling, and everyone's bringing up their favorite story-driven experiences. Shadow of the Colossus, Bioshock, Half-Life, Grim Fandango - heck, I'm ready to bring up a few of my own.
None of these are Citizen Kane? In what respect? Completely universal recognition as a champion of the medium's storytelling? True, perhaps no one single game is the unchallenged champion of the industry's storytelling skill.
Actually, carelesshx says it better:
In the end, though, I think this has at least gotten us all talking about video game storytelling. In that sense, this article is quite the success.carelesshx said:
There are plenty of truly great -- great as in Goethe, Tagore, Brecht, Morrison, Miyazaki -- games out there. Here's the short list of certifiable classics:
Max Payne (2001)
They Hunger (2001)
Metal Gear Solid 3 (2004) [Note that the canonic version is the Subsistence edition, released in 2005]
Shadow of the Colossus (2005)
Final Fantasy 12 (2006)
Metal Gear Solid 4 (2008)
But the metrics are different: great games have great *game-play* as well as great sound-tracks, characters, visuals, scripts, voice-acting, set-design, etc. Also, all the great games dig deep into the resources of the digital commons.
Max Payne (2001)
They Hunger (2001)
Metal Gear Solid 3 (2004) [Note that the canonic version is the Subsistence edition, released in 2005]
Shadow of the Colossus (2005)
Final Fantasy 12 (2006)
Metal Gear Solid 4 (2008)
But the metrics are different: great games have great *game-play* as well as great sound-tracks, characters, visuals, scripts, voice-acting, set-design, etc. Also, all the great games dig deep into the resources of the digital commons.
The Citizen Kane of video-games?I found it a few months ago.It probably has the best game-story ever made:-
http://www.crestfallen.us/
http://www.crestfallen.us/
God I know I'm going to recieve so much hate for this but, Citizen Kane, I felt, was not so much on the story as it was on the composition and cinematography. I can't explain why, it just doesn't sing all too brilliantly to me. In terms of cinema I'd say there have been much better installments that people just don't want to hear about.
Besides, there are some fantastic games out there to make this list- not purely for story admittedly but just on the grounds of mastering the medium at their given time.
Super Mario Brothers
Legend of Zelda OOT
FInal Fantasy VII
Metal Gear Solid
Devil May Cry
You've heard it all before, I don't really have to list them.
Besides, there are some fantastic games out there to make this list- not purely for story admittedly but just on the grounds of mastering the medium at their given time.
Super Mario Brothers
Legend of Zelda OOT
FInal Fantasy VII
Metal Gear Solid
Devil May Cry
You've heard it all before, I don't really have to list them.
"A pretentious collection of QTEs" BINGO!
Sorry to repeat previous post! The title of the piece is misleading...Citizen Kane wasn't a major cinematic achievement for its story, but its cinematography...movies and tv didn't simply replicate radio, they created new art forms. VG are not a particularly good medium for narrative storytelling, and David Cage's comment on this is the funniest. But there have been interesting examples of non-narrative storytelling (e.g. Braid), and very creative uses of interactivity, including some that have redefined entertainment (Guitar Crazy and its progeny, and of course Wii Sports). These may be punctuations in a sea of derivative me-too stuff, but again similar enough to other media. I still remember the Raiders of the Lost Ark tv show knockoffs from the 1980s.
Sorry to repeat previous post! The title of the piece is misleading...Citizen Kane wasn't a major cinematic achievement for its story, but its cinematography...movies and tv didn't simply replicate radio, they created new art forms. VG are not a particularly good medium for narrative storytelling, and David Cage's comment on this is the funniest. But there have been interesting examples of non-narrative storytelling (e.g. Braid), and very creative uses of interactivity, including some that have redefined entertainment (Guitar Crazy and its progeny, and of course Wii Sports). These may be punctuations in a sea of derivative me-too stuff, but again similar enough to other media. I still remember the Raiders of the Lost Ark tv show knockoffs from the 1980s.
Hmm, good point. It would be hard to make a good Broadway play if every 2 minutes a member of the audience had to read out a line of dialogue or come up and act out a death scene.
Really games are just TOO different from film or books for any really adequate analogies.
Really games are just TOO different from film or books for any really adequate analogies.
Imagine if Hollywood in the 80's became obsessed with making the Pac-Man of movies. We never would have had the movie Aliens due to all movies trying to recreate the Pac-Man magic and the inspiration for most of the games of the past 20 years would never have happened. What a nightmarish scenario!
I dislike the comparison of games to movies as it seems to negate the fact that games are interactive.
If there were to be an equivilant game to Citizen Kane, it must surely be one that defines good gameplay not story as I believe that is where the true artistry in games lies.
If there were to be an equivilant game to Citizen Kane, it must surely be one that defines good gameplay not story as I believe that is where the true artistry in games lies.