Interactive Storytelling

[A1]

Okay, he just said it was "not non-linear," like, a million times. Happy now, A1? [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/6.181376.5383260] If not, I wish I could afford to fund a trip so you could visit the Mana Bar and ask him to write "linear" on a piece of paper. Then draw a line under it to clarify he understands the concept of linearity.

Anyway, the build currently consists of a small asteroid cluster littered with the debris of a crashed ship, with five salvage crates scattered around that make a little thing pop up on the GUI when you collect them. The first problem I've run into is that it's as boring as shit. This tends to be the way things go with game design; you can have all the theory in the world but the moment you put anything into practice it sprouts issues like a Chia pet.

A-freaking-men. I must have created over a dozen little projects over the last couple years that I abandoned for this reason. Right now, I'm thinking maybe it's best to go completely freeform, which refutes something I believed earlier: that it's best to have the entire game designed in advance.

I can only assume that you're talking to me with that first part of your post (thank you for lacking clarity on that).

Yeah, I was talking to you, and the clarity should have been self-evident by the context of the link to the post where we left off on this.

Unfortunately Yahtzee doesn't really provide any new answers. He really only repeated something he already said in his video review. But worst of all he only addressed one particular aspect of the game and not the game itself. He has still done nothing to reconcile his contrasting statements and formulate one overarching and all-encompassing conclusion. So I guess we're going to be stuck in mixed and ambiguous territory for the foreseeable future.

Curses. I need to win the lottery so I can have that in-person Yahtzee line drawing exercise I was talking about done.

Ah well. As I've surmised for awhile now, some matters cannot be resolved via talking them through, but rather by a fundamental change of the nature one or more involved parties. It seems to me that it's just too important for you right now to believe that Heavy Rain is a "great game" to try to understand how it is that Yahtzee has painstakingly explained it is not.

Unbelievable. "To try to understand how it is" you say? That's exactly the problem. No one should have to try to understand how someone's opinion is after they've supposedly given it. Yahtzee has not made his opinion particularly clear, if at all. All we have are a bunch of varied and contrasting implications. To make matters worse Yahtzee has also had a tendency to be somewhat unpredictable with regard to his opinions.

For example he gave a thoroughly negative review of Uncharted 2 yet he still included it on his list of the best games of 2009.

And on the other hand he was much more lenient and easygoing with Dragon Age: Origins yet he did not include Dragon Age: Origins on that same list. On top of that he also strongly implied that anything not included on the list was bad.

My issue with his opinion on Heavy Rain is pretty much the same issue I have with his opinion on Bayonetta. He may give us a rough idea of what his opinion is, but at the end of the day we've got no conclusive proof one way or the other.

Trying to understand how it is? That sounds an awful lot like interpretation. And as far as the idea of proof is concerned interpretation is by it's very nature a dead end.

 

[TimbukTurnip]

For the space game, you could say either that if the enemy sees you they will use a tractor beam on you, or that the asteriods are very explosive, similar to the asteriods on peragus 2 at the beginning of KOTOR 2, and that if they see you, they'll fire on the asteriods, causing them to explode and destroy your ship.

 

[geldonyetich]

Trying to understand how it is? That sounds an awful lot like interpretation. And as far as the idea of proof is concerned interpretation is by it's very nature a dead end.

You're an interesting fellow to first demand Yahtzee better explain himself and then to follow that up with the point that that a person's interpretation would make such an endeavor pointless.

Personally, I thought Yahtzee couldn't have been clearer in that last review when he flat out said, "as a game, Heavy Rain is a pile of poo poo pancakes." You questioned my saying that he was saying the game was overly linear, Extra Punctuation clarifies he says this is "not non-linear" several times.

As my university department lead professor is fond of saying, there's a difference between understanding that something can be interpreted in many ways and believing that every answer is right. I think you're well over the line on this one, to draw the conclusions I have are unusually well within reason in the particular case of his Heavy Rain review and follow up textual supplement.

 

[Dulkal]

I don't agree with the whole "killer changes depending on actions" angle. I'd play a detective story to find out who the killer was. Knowing that there was no truth to be found except for my actions would kind of spoil it for me. It lends itself to a certain linearity, but that's allright with me because the whole point of the genre is to work towards the reveal.

As for the limited replayability this offers, if a randomized killer is too much work it doesn't matter too much for me if the game is best the first time. In fact, I hate it when a game assumes that I play it several times to get value for my money.

 

[Mr. Gency]

Doesn't shattered memories have PS2 and PSP versions?

Yes it does. I played any beat it on PSP. It a lot like the Wii version.

 

[A1]

Trying to understand how it is? That sounds an awful lot like interpretation. And as far as the idea of proof is concerned interpretation is by it's very nature a dead end.

You're an interesting fellow to first demand Yahtzee better explain himself and then to follow that up with the point that that a person's interpretation would make such an endeavor pointless.

Personally, I thought Yahtzee couldn't have been clearer in that last review when he flat out said, "as a game, Heavy Rain is a pile of poo poo pancakes." You questioned my saying that he was saying the game was overly linear, Extra Punctuation clarifies he says this is "not non-linear" several times.

As my university department lead professor is fond of saying, there's a difference between understanding that something can be interpreted in many ways and believing that every answer is right. I think you're well over the line on this one, to draw the conclusions I have are unusually well within reason in the particular case of his Heavy Rain review and follow up textual supplement.

Okay, now you seem to be interpreting, or perhaps twisting, my words in a certain way. Yes, I would like Yahtzee to better explain himself. But I never said anything about interpretation making that pointless. My point is that if you want something definitive, then interpretation is not the way to go. In this case and in the case of Bayonetta, I would like something definitive. Something that doesn't leave any room for any reasonable doubt.

And I didn't question you saying that the game was overly linear. I merely stated that you were saying something, namely using the word "linear", that Yahtzee didn't. But now indeed the word linear appears to be officially in play. And that's fine.

However this does nothing to resolve the overall issue of Yahtzee's non-existent final conclusion. How exactly does a pile of poo-poo pancakes get better later? And how exactly does a pile of poo-poo pancakes have some genuinely good bits? These are questions that you can certainly think up some perfectly reasonable and logical answers to. But only Yahtzee can truly answer these questions because this is Yahtzee's opinion we're talking about. Which brings me to my next point.

I never said that your conclusions weren't within reason. But you see that's totally irrelevant. The words that leap out at me this time are "personally, I thought". Sorry, but this is not about you. This is not about what you think.

This is about what Yahtzee thinks, and not what you think Yahtzee thinks. And it would seem that until Yahtzee draws a definitive and unyielding final conclusion about the game as a whole this issue is going to remain unresolved.

 

[heinieee]

For your little boss problem.
How about the boss creating a large energy field arround you so you cant fly out.
Or he has a "tractor beam"-like mechanic so you cant fly too far away

 

[ResiEvalJohn]

Dear Yatzee, I have an idea for the fun fun space game,

How about whenever enemy ships detect the presence of you in the game, they set up a large force field that encompasses the player and surrounding given area. Therefore, you can't just fly away because running into the forcefield will greet you with a gameover screen.

From there you could set up any kind of mission you wanted in the forcefield (Keep in mind, the force field area could be big enough to enclose a galaxy.) In some missions, you could have the player use stealth to reach the force field generator and shut it off, so that you are free to go to light speed and escape. In other missions, you could have a "destroy all enemies" mission where the force field can't be deactivated until all ships are destroyed.

So, it would be possible to have a main base where you can go to get various upgrades for your ship that would be in an RPG style. Some upgrades are good for stealth missions, others for fighting missions. Maybe the ship could even turn into some kind of Gundam robot thing!

Ok, so these are the ideas I came up with while I was bored at work, I hope they help!
I also hope you read all the comments on your articles...

 

[Mr. Gency]

I don't agree with the whole "killer changes depending on actions" angle. I'd play a detective story to find out who the killer was. Knowing that there was no truth to be found except for my actions would kind of spoil it for me. It lends itself to a certain linearity, but that's allright with me because the whole point of the genre is to work towards the reveal.

How about this for a detective game?
You have a open world and there a few crimes to solve. Then when you done you can see how devious you are by going online and comiting a crime and posting it online for others to solve. Players wouldn't run out of killers to catch.

 

[pyrus7]

I don't agree with the whole "killer changes depending on actions" angle. I'd play a detective story to find out who the killer was. Knowing that there was no truth to be found except for my actions would kind of spoil it for me. It lends itself to a certain linearity, but that's allright with me because the whole point of the genre is to work towards the reveal.

I think what should have happened is that, not only did the killer changed based on your actions, but that the clues revealed during the story also changed depending on your actions.

And for the space game, why not just let the player fly away from the big enemy? If he has a reason to salvage the stuff while avoiding the enemy, he will; if he doesn't want to salvage, then he'll just fly away.

 

[Snowalker]

I still disagree with your "the killer never changes complaint". A murder mystery where the killer is always different can never have the wonderful things such as "foreshadowing" and "subtle nods". Yes, you might not see a point to replaying it (I did see one, though) because it's practically always the same but changing the killer would mean screwing up the story.'

Shame, I was hoping he would address Michael Atkinson in this issue.

Oh well, maybe he'll comment on it later

He apathetically adressed that one in Twitter.

I disagree, you can have foreshadowing and all that, it'd just take a shit load more time and money.

 

[BigKevSexyMan]

Somethings strange...half, if not more, of the people replying to your article seem to be more interested in Fun Space Game: The Game. And I'm one of them (no offense).

I actually have a couple questions/suggestions. Although you probably aren't taking design ideas from the hundreds of yokels on this board(myself included).

Question 1) If you have to move at a constant speed, then how exactly can you use debris and such as cover?
Suggestion: Make it so that you can attach yourself to an asteroid or ship, but you HAVE to make it a challenge to do so. Maybe you can make it so that you have to match the direction of rotation and get your speed just right in order to attach to the asteroid. And if you fail, then you can take damage and possibly alert your enemies to you.

Suggestion 2) When it comes to boundaries, going out and exploring absolutely nothing can end up in some real disasters, especially if the player has no way of knowing how to get back. There's a lot of things you can do to fix this issue.
1) Have enemy pirate ships come out from no where and destroy you when you get to far
2) Have a waypoint so that you know which direction to travel to get back
3) Not sure if your toolkit will be capable of this, but dynamically allocate entirely new areas almost by random(but still implement the waypoint back). I would be willing to bet that would be the best solution as it allows you to just go explore if you ever get board, or just need a small break from the current mission.

 

[GoldenShadow]

Ok, about your space game. Why are you trying to force players to play a certain way. Option 1 would be to hide in the garbage filled asteroid field and wait for the enemy capital ship to leave. Option 2 is to haul ass away into the void so you stay out of their sensor scanners, and wait for the capital ship to leave far away. Then fly all the way back to finish your mission. Problem solved. Just make sure that the play will understand that both options are viable. And that option 3, fighting back, is a stupid choice.

 

[MangaVally]

I agree with SuccessAndBiscuts!!! Whats wrong with Glasgow?? Glasgow is a bloody good city too end up in!!!

 

[the1ultimate]

There you go then. Yahtzee says Heavy Rain is not interactive storytelling.

I'm inclined to agree, without even having played the game.

 

[MrRags]

Solution the scary ship has a tractor beam which will beam you back if you make a break for it... after it has you it kills you... or you use an expensive anti tractor beam (a 1 use device you find in the boxes) to escape and hid. this rewards the player who doesn't run.....

 

[geldonyetich]

This is about what Yahtzee thinks, and not what you think Yahtzee thinks. And it would seem that until Yahtzee draws a definitive and unyielding final conclusion about the game as a whole this issue is going to remain unresolved.

Well, I thought it was pretty clear what he thought, but I guess that it doesn't matter. I'm not going to hold what he thinks as being at all important to my world view. Why should I? Frankly, I've been gaming at least as long as he has. That's probably why I can understand what he's saying without ambiguity while you're still uncertain.

 

[fanklok]

Well I haven't played Heavy Rain because I played Indigo Prophecy and after a rousing 8 hours of finger DDR and accidental suicides (how was I supposed to know those where the kind of pills you don't mix with alcohol?) I've had enough of the interactive story games for a life time

and yahtzee just make up a bunch of eally long scientific sounding words to explain everything that isn't directly related to something

 

[ThommyGun]

You could say that cosmic radiation had concentrated in the area and that if you wandered too far away... radioactive death! And I suppose you say something about a magnetic field emitting from the asteroids is protecting you. Also, this could be a reason to be getting the crates (beside the normal scavenger things), protection to leave the system. Just a thought.

 

[Ciran]

"But if there's a big enemy around, what, exactly, is keeping the player from just fleeing to a safe distance?"

You could always make it a ship that is some part of the organization, and it will identify the player if they try to run rather than hide, which will mean any other ship that is part of that organization will try to attack/capture/etc since they've already been notified about who the player is and that they should be dealt with.