Telling a story, in computer games

Maxinquaye · Oct 30, 2011

I was rereading the thread about Dragon Age 2, where there's a subthread about the story in that game. It struck me that perhaps it would be useful to talk about how to tell a story in a computer game.

Maybe my search-fu is severely lacking, but I couldn't find a thread about this, so I just went ahead and started this one.

I'm thinking about three very different kind of games:

Fallout 3 from Bethesda (or Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, that uses the same story telling system)
Dragon Age from BioWare

BioWare tends to tell linear stories, while Bethesda tends to create open sandbox games where they only supply the frame.

What are the differences in story telling, do you think, between interactive computer games and fiction? Are there any differences?

maxmordon · Oct 31, 2011

I haven't played Dragon Age, but I know what you say.

I believe the different comes from the structure: in Fallout 3 you must flesh out alternative views of the same plot. Think of it like in those Choose Your Adventure Books where you can choose to fight for the orange army or the blue army. Nonetheless, there are limitations and it cannot be fleshed out more proper than a single linear story.

Think of it as a river, you can have little channels going to the sea or one stream with different lakes and irrigation systems but is always the same stream going to the sea.

DeleyanLee · Oct 31, 2011

Having played all three games, I'd say they're all pretty much the same in story telling and you missed another form of story telling, such as in Assassin's Creed or Uncharted where what needs to be done isn't ever a choice, how you get it done is.

While I got through Fallout 3, I couldn't get into either Dragon Age or Oblivion because once I got through the beginning bit, the moment I was thrust into the main part of the story, I didn't give a whit about figuring out the rest of the story. It wasn't even so much a "Choose Your Own Adventure" thing, it almost feels like I was supposed to totally write the entire story myself. Didn't like it. If I want to write the entire story myself, I have my MIP. I don't need a game to do it.

I like games like Assassin's Creed or Uncharted better because I can sit back and be entertained by the story, yet there's good challenge in getting done what needs to be done between story bits.

Different types of story for different ratios to work to entertainment, I guess.

JohnnyGottaKeyboard · Oct 31, 2011

DeleyanLee said:
Having played all three games, I'd say they're all pretty much the same in story telling and you missed another form of story telling, such as in Assassin's Creed or Uncharted where what needs to be done isn't ever a choice, how you get it done is.

That's interesting to hear because I've tried to play recent Final fantasy Games and found them to be more of an interactive cartoon and wondered how anyone would enjoy playing that. Yet, the way you describe it, sounds perfectly reasonable.

Let me admit at this point that I don't remember giant patches of 2010 (and I had two books published!!!) because I spent long spells finding and closing Oblivion Gates.

That being said, I loved the Prince of Persia games which sound a lot like Assassin's Creed (of the two games you mentioned, I've only played Uncharted II, and that was mostly "watching" my son play it). In POP, my only nit to pick is that I often wish there was more than one way to solve a specific puzzle. That way it would feel more like I "used the materials at hand to solve a situation" rather than "looked at the materials at hand and just figured out what the programmers wanted me to do".

Shadow Dragon · Oct 31, 2011

Personally, I love both the linear and choose your own adventure games (both the more structured kind that Bioware makes and the more open kine that Bethesda makes). They each have pros and cons to them.

The main pro for open games, is the environments and the amount of detail they put into the history of the land. You could spend days just studying the history of Tamrial (sp?). Or spend tons of time reading people's last diary entries as they die in their vault or to nuclear weapons (Fallout 3/NV). You get the sense that that world really does have a history. And it has a more immersion. You actually feel like you're a part of that world. The main con though is that it's probably harder to make a main plot for those games. Though I think Bethesda has done a decent job of that, whether it's the lone wonderer trying to find his/her father/complete their father's work or trying to stop Daguth Ur for overrunning Morrowind.

On the other hand, linear stories usually give us better characters and main stories. This can also lead to more heartfelt moments, like when a major character dies (something that the Final Fantasy series is famous for doing). You won't care about the world as much, but you will care more about the major characters and the game is more likely to bring out more emotion in its players. The con is that at times, it feels really restrictive in what you can do.

Maxinquaye · Nov 1, 2011

I think Bethesda and BioWare do exist on each extreme here, as regards to story telling in their games: Bethesda creates a world, a set of world rules, and the game is about surviving the world. How you do that, and your moral choices are, mostly up to you. Then tacked onto this is a main quest line that you may or may not follow. That too is optional, for the most part. For me, I put hundreds of hours into Oblivion and Fallout 3, and the bulk of that time was spent crawling through some space that had nothing to do with the main story line.

I remember one assignment in Fallout 3, where one of the npc's sent you to collect 30 bottles of Nuka-cola. It was quirky and strange, and had absolutely nothing to do with anything but to fulfill the mad dream of one specific npc. Or where you decide the fate of Megaton. Excellent stuff, and fine story telling, but it still had nothing to do with the main quest.

You could lose yourself in the Fallout 3 world a lot.

In contrast, if you don't do the quest in Dragon Age or Mass Effect, the big bioware games, you don't progress at all. Again, fine story telling, but very different. Like someone said above, it became more poignant at times, but the world-locations were just cutesy backdrops that you forgot about as soon as you were done with the mission that took place there.

DeleyanLee · Nov 1, 2011

Maxinquaye said:
I think Bethesda and BioWare do exist on each extreme here, as regards to story telling in their games: Bethesda creates a world, a set of world rules, and the game is about surviving the world. How you do that, and your moral choices are, mostly up to you. Then tacked onto this is a main quest line that you may or may not follow. That too is optional, for the most part. For me, I put hundreds of hours into Oblivion and Fallout 3, and the bulk of that time was spent crawling through some space that had nothing to do with the main story line.

I guess that's likely. I'll be honest--I didn't get far in Oblivion. I just kept hitting points where I'd stop playing because I just didn't give two wits about what was going on and the gaming part wasn't very exciting. I'd heard so much about what a wonderful game it was--the closest thing to date to actual D&D RPGing--and it was meh. It's likely just me.

I remember one assignment in Fallout 3, where one of the npc's sent you to collect 30 bottles of Nuka-cola. It was quirky and strange, and had absolutely nothing to do with anything but to fulfill the mad dream of one specific npc. Or where you decide the fate of Megaton. Excellent stuff, and fine story telling, but it still had nothing to do with the main quest. You could lose yourself in the Fallout 3 world a lot.

Actually, it was Nuka-Cola Quantums (the one that glowed in the dark, literally) that she wanted.

I've actually gotten through the entire main storyline of Fallout 3, though I haven't played through any amount of the DLC I've got for it. I'm playing it through again so I can get all the trophies. I'm not having the problem with it that I did with Oblivion, but I've got to be in a particular mood to blow things up (I lurves my missile launcher & fat man) in order to play it. Haven't found another game in this ilk that I like as well.

In contrast, if you don't do the quest in Dragon Age or Mass Effect, the big bioware games, you don't progress at all. Again, fine story telling, but very different. Like someone said above, it became more poignant at times, but the world-locations were just cutesy backdrops that you forgot about as soon as you were done with the mission that took place there.

May have to try Mass Effect (my daughter keeps pushing it at me), but I wasn't impressed with Dragon Age. Of course, I think that's mainly because I kept getting lost in all the translation from D&D stuff that I didn't understand. The physical irritations of how to fight in that game really irked me too, but I got through most of it before I gave up on it for lack of caring about the story.

I'm not so much about the worlds, honestly. I want a story I can really care about and I've just noticed that most of the open-world games I've tried don't give me enough story and characters to make it worth the effort to play the game.

Likewise, games like Price of Persia and God of War are so much "tromp through the plot" with no options for anything else that I got bored with them even quicker than I did with Oblivion or Dragon Age. I'm probably weird in my preferences, or maybe it's my age showing.

efkelley · Nov 1, 2011

DeleyanLee said:
May have to try Mass Effect (my daughter keeps pushing it at me), but I wasn't impressed with Dragon Age.

Well, Mass Effect has the same 'sandbox' kind of feel that Dragon Age Origins does. Once you're out of the prologue, it's up to you where to go and what to do. They give you a direction, such as in DAO when they're pushing you to go to Redcliffe after Lothering, but if you want to go somewhere else, you can.

I greatly enjoyed Mass Effect and ME2. In fact, Mass Effect 2 is even better than Mass Effect in terms of gameplay and story, in my opinion. Which is not to say you should skip ME1, by any means, but it's very rare for a sequel to outshine the original.

DeleyanLee · Nov 1, 2011

efkelley said:
I greatly enjoyed Mass Effect and ME2. In fact, Mass Effect 2 is even better than Mass Effect in terms of gameplay and story, in my opinion. Which is not to say you should skip ME1, by any means, but it's very rare for a sequel to outshine the original.

Well, I only have a PS3, so there is no Mass Effect for me. Though I understand they've added something to ME2 to cover that base, from what my daughter says.

joeyc · Nov 1, 2011

Videogames have to tell stories in different ways.

In Bethesda games, the world is so massive, the main story gets side tracked and forgotten about. "But I want to explore this cave over here. Which led to another cave. And now I'm all the way on the other side of the world doing some stuff for a dragon. Sorry, King Guy. Your important quest will have to wait another 30 hours or so." As such, I usually don't find the main story that compelling, and it's not so much for the story as it is for the experience of discovering this world.

I actually approve of Deus Ex: Human Revolution throwing this trope on its head, by the way.

BioWare games (while solidly made) are rather formulaic if you look at them closely. In its most simplistic form (DA2 aside), its basically go recruit your band of (anti-)heroes, then storm the castle.

Brutal Mustang · Nov 4, 2011

efkelley said:
Well, Mass Effect has the same 'sandbox' kind of feel that Dragon Age Origins does. Once you're out of the prologue, it's up to you where to go and what to do. They give you a direction, such as in DAO when they're pushing you to go to Redcliffe after Lothering, but if you want to go somewhere else, you can. I greatly enjoyed Mass Effect and ME2. In fact, Mass Effect 2 is even better than Mass Effect in terms of gameplay and story, in my opinion. Which is not to say you should skip ME1, by any means, but it's very rare for a sequel to outshine the original.

I recently bought Dragon Age II, and hated it. Spent a couple of hours creating a cool character. And then what does the game do? It puts him all tiny on the screen, where I can't even admire him. And half the time I'm playing as his companions instead of him. And the graphics sucked. Oh, and the fighting sucked even more. Didn't 'feel' right at all. I gave up quickly on this game.

A couple days later, I went out and got Mass Effect 2. The guy at Game Stop warned me I'd be lost in the story and all. But I was able to figure out what was going on pretty quickly. Perhaps, even, I enjoyed it even more. It was like reading a book that makes you ponder on the back story. Also, I liked they way it puts the player close to the character--you know, with the character framing the bottom of the screen, instead of that stupid aerial view in Dragon Age. Found myself spending hours on this game, in the same way I do with a new Assassin's Creed game.

So yeah, in my book, Dragon Age II and Mass Effect II are light years apart as far as games go.

DeleyanLee · Nov 4, 2011

My experience, thus far, is that there's three basic ways of telling a story in a gaming environment, and it's all in the balance of game to story.

One Extreme: Duke Nukem and other "shooters" seem to me to have the least amount of story and the greatest amount of gaming.

Other Extreme: Prince of Persia, God of War and such seem to me to have a great amount of story which traps the gaming into the story and makes playing very linear and straight-forward.

Yet Another Extreme: Oblivion, Dragon's Age, Fallout and such seems to have less story, but allows the gamer to pretty much create their experience almost entirely.

Mid-ground: Assassin's Creed, Uncharted as such seem to me to have more amount of story but allows the gaming to make each play-through more unique and allow more choice for the player.

What I'm curious about, through my own limited experience with games, is if the stories that fall into these rough categories have things in common. Can anyone more knowledgeable give some insight?

JimmyB27 · Nov 4, 2011

DeleyanLee said:
My experience, thus far, is that there's three basic ways of telling a story in a gaming environment, and it's all in the balance of game to story.

One Extreme: Duke Nukem and other "shooters" seem to me to have the least amount of story and the greatest amount of gaming.

Other Extreme: Prince of Persia, God of War and such seem to me to have a great amount of story which traps the gaming into the story and makes playing very linear and straight-forward.

Yet Another Extreme: Oblivion, Dragon's Age, Fallout and such seems to have less story, but allows the gamer to pretty much create their experience almost entirely.

Mid-ground: Assassin's Creed, Uncharted as such seem to me to have more amount of story but allows the gaming to make each play-through more unique and allow more choice for the player.

What I'm curious about, through my own limited experience with games, is if the stories that fall into these rough categories have things in common. Can anyone more knowledgeable give some insight?

Seems like a reasonable overview. Although, of course, there are the classic outliers like the Half Life series which is a shooter, but with excellent story telling.

efkelley · Nov 4, 2011

DeleyanLee said:
My experience, thus far, is that there's three basic ways of telling a story in a gaming environment, and it's all in the balance of game to story.

One Extreme: Duke Nukem and other "shooters" seem to me to have the least amount of story and the greatest amount of gaming.

Other Extreme: Prince of Persia, God of War and such seem to me to have a great amount of story which traps the gaming into the story and makes playing very linear and straight-forward.

Yet Another Extreme: Oblivion, Dragon's Age, Fallout and such seems to have less story, but allows the gamer to pretty much create their experience almost entirely.

Mid-ground: Assassin's Creed, Uncharted as such seem to me to have more amount of story but allows the gaming to make each play-through more unique and allow more choice for the player.

What I'm curious about, through my own limited experience with games, is if the stories that fall into these rough categories have things in common. Can anyone more knowledgeable give some insight?

In your list, I don't think Dragon Age (at least Origins) is in the same category as Fallout and Oblivion. Dragon Age is entirely about story. You might have side quests, but you're always in a location vital to the central plot. In Oblivion, after you finish up the bit with the town that got destroyed by the Oblivion Gate, you can do anything you want. Same goes for Fallout. As soon as you leave the vault, you need never go look for dear old dad.

But, to answer the question, the only difference in the categories that comes to mind is the style of play.

Shooters just need a reason to shoot. Gears of War and Halo get hailed as having 'great story' but honestly you always resolve the problems in the same way: Shoot. It's expected. It's a shooter. It would annoy people if Seargeant McSquintyFace allowed the queen alien to go on her way, thus ending the invasion. And rightfully so.

Your Prince of Persia, God of War, Dragon Age and Mass Effect type stories are linear. Sometimes they disguise the linear nature by letting you choose which plot arc you go to next, but you're still on the same path.

In fact, the BioWare games should probably be put in their own list since the decisions the character makes has an impact on the way the game plays later. Prince of Persia and God of War have no real decision making aspects.

Assassin's Creed and Uncharted are also very linear, but with more options than God of War type stuff. You're still in a place doing a Thing, but it's completely up to you to figure out how to go about it. The Thing doesn't change. You MUST accomplish the goal to advance the game, but your methods might vary greatly between playthroughs. In God of War and Prince of Persia, you must also accomplish the Thing, but usually there's just one solution (typically involving Kratos or the Prince breaking out the climbing equipment and scaling Godzilla to stab him in the eardrum.)

DeleyanLee · Nov 4, 2011

efkelley said:
In God of War and Prince of Persia, you must also accomplish the Thing, but usually there's just one solution (typically involving Kratos or the Prince breaking out the climbing equipment and scaling Godzilla to stab him in the eardrum.)

YES! You just made my night!

joeyc · Nov 4, 2011

efkelley said:
In your list, I don't think Dragon Age (at least Origins) is in the same category as Fallout and Oblivion. Dragon Age is entirely about story. You might have side quests, but you're always in a location vital to the central plot. In Oblivion, after you finish up the bit with the town that got destroyed by the Oblivion Gate, you can do anything you want. Same goes for Fallout. As soon as you leave the vault, you need never go look for dear old dad.

But, to answer the question, the only difference in the categories that comes to mind is the style of play.

Shooters just need a reason to shoot. Gears of War and Halo get hailed as having 'great story' but honestly you always resolve the problems in the same way: Shoot. It's expected. It's a shooter. It would annoy people if Seargeant McSquintyFace allowed the queen alien to go on her way, thus ending the invasion. And rightfully so.

Your Prince of Persia, God of War, Dragon Age and Mass Effect type stories are linear. Sometimes they disguise the linear nature by letting you choose which plot arc you go to next, but you're still on the same path.

In fact, the BioWare games should probably be put in their own list since the decisions the character makes has an impact on the way the game plays later. Prince of Persia and God of War have no real decision making aspects.

Assassin's Creed and Uncharted are also very linear, but with more options than God of War type stuff. You're still in a place doing a Thing, but it's completely up to you to figure out how to go about it. The Thing doesn't change. You MUST accomplish the goal to advance the game, but your methods might vary greatly between playthroughs. In God of War and Prince of Persia, you must also accomplish the Thing, but usually there's just one solution (typically involving Kratos or the Prince breaking out the climbing equipment and scaling Godzilla to stab him in the eardrum.)

The type of genre tends to define the story, so I mostly agree with your point.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (the first one, from a single player standpoint) had a rather good story. But because it's a shooter, you're either going to be shooting terrorists or aliens (usually). Sometimes both.

Deus Ex: Human Revolution is another good example having many ways to do The Thing (well, except for boss fights, but that's another story). You can sneak your way through without firing a bullet. You can hack things. You can shoot your way through.

froley · Nov 4, 2011

About 95% of games stories are half-baked bollocks (your Calls of Duty, Assassin's Creedses, Grand Thefts Auto, Red Factions, Resident Evils, Just Causes, Crysises, Haloses, Gearses of War, Uncharteds, Marios, Zeldas, etc.) but there are a rare few (BioWare RPGs, DXHR, Bethesda's games if I'm feeling generous) that incorporate the player's choices into the game's world. Those are the only games that truly grab me, storytelling-wise.

Don't get me wrong, those other games have great gameplay and/or graphics or whatever, I do enjoy them. But they tell stories that are obviously after-thoughts, written outside the main production cycle to join together setpieces. Even when they try to go character-based (Uncharted, the latter Gears games), it's kind of like "ha, that's cute, but I'm not here to watch a movie."

I still think, 4 years later, that Mass Effect is the best example of interactive storytelling our medium has to offer. KOTOR before it was damn solid, but we're yet to make another iterative leap. So everything gets compared to ME, and everything comes up short, in my eyes.

crunchyblanket · Nov 8, 2011

I still think, 4 years later, that Mass Effect is the best example of interactive storytelling our medium has to offer

Mass Effect is a brilliant example, absolutely, but I'm not sure it's alone up there at the pinnacle. Heavy Rain was the single most engaging game, story wise, that I've ever played. The Metal Gear Solid series, despite being completely bonkers, was also massively involving and both games were clearly built around the story, as opposed to the story being built into the game. In MGS's case, you can actually see where Kojima's ideas grew and changed as the games progress (although this does lead to irritating retcons in later instalments)

Of course, some gamers didn't like them because they were so story-heavy, and comparatively gameplay-light, but you know. Diff'rent strokes and all that.

MoLoLu · Nov 10, 2011

My problem with stories in games is the extremes don't do it for me.

You either get a way too expansive story where I'm utterly lost
DA Origins
Warcraft 3 / Starcraft 2
Deus Ex Human Revolutions

Or you get a story which is so simplistic or thin I can't find the story to begin with
COD games
Crysis
Assassin's Creed
Tomb Raider

I think the ones that do it right for me are the ones that take the midground. A just enough story and good gameplay
Mass Effect
Dead Space

Or because they're there for gameplay/fun only
Fable
Half Life

I honestly don't care how complicated the story is or good the graphics are as long as it's done all right. There's something good in all these games. I've played the one's I've mentioned and they were all cool. I'm just saying very few actually integrate story and gameplay in a good way.

Thinking back, my favorite example is Homeworld. Really simple story but integrated very well into the gameplay. Sure, lots of flaws, but the immersion into the world got me.

Telling a story, in computer games

Maxinquaye

That cheeky buggerer

maxmordon

Penúltimo

DeleyanLee

Writing Anarchist

JohnnyGottaKeyboard

Who let this guy in...?

Shadow Dragon

Maxinquaye

That cheeky buggerer

DeleyanLee

Writing Anarchist

efkelley

ow

DeleyanLee

Writing Anarchist

joeyc

Brutal Mustang

Loves interplanetary chaos.

DeleyanLee

Writing Anarchist

JimmyB27

Hoopy frood

efkelley

ow

DeleyanLee

Writing Anarchist

joeyc

froley

crunchyblanket

the Juggernaut of Imperfection

MoLoLu