24th March 2005, 11:22 PM
If they're going to choose five people for this article, they chose some of the very best... that's what makes this article so great. The fact that these people aren't just talking, they've proven that they can deliver. And they show that here.
Avellone: Torment, KotOR 2
Tornquist: The Longest Journey, Dreamfall (upcoming) (will this finally get you to pay more attention to this series? I've posted multiple things about the game, but have been generally ignored...)
Levine: System Shock 2, Tribes: Vengeance, Freedom Force
Schaefer: Maniac Mansion 2, Grim Fandango, Full Throttle
Kojima: MGS
Probably his reaction is that strong because his Torment is one of the best examples of that gaming has ever produced. :)
I'd have quoted these (in full) too, though. For the graphics question.
... but then I want to quote all of the other four replies too... all five of them make good points worth listening to!
Definitely a great article and well worth reading. I don't agree with everything, such as the thing about game stories... sure, most games don't have great stories. True. But is it really as bad as some of them suggest? I'd be more inclined to agree with Tornquist or Avellone than Kojima or Levine on that one.
Avellone: Torment, KotOR 2
Tornquist: The Longest Journey, Dreamfall (upcoming) (will this finally get you to pay more attention to this series? I've posted multiple things about the game, but have been generally ignored...)
Levine: System Shock 2, Tribes: Vengeance, Freedom Force
Schaefer: Maniac Mansion 2, Grim Fandango, Full Throttle
Kojima: MGS
Quote:What would you say to someone who told you that games have universally terrible stories?
Chris Avellone: I'd say game stories can be a little formulaic at times and a little unpolished, but then I would point up at the sky and say, "Holy s***, look at that!" And when they do, I would punch them in the gut, and while they were gasping for breath, I would lean down and go, "You are wrong. There are several games with compelling stories, stories that achieve greater strength because it's a story you can interact with. Thus, the experience is even more personal than reading a novel, where you are basically watching the characters go about their adventures without any participation from you except flicking your eyes across the page." At this point, the person would be about to get up, so I would kick them in the shins and then run.
Probably his reaction is that strong because his Torment is one of the best examples of that gaming has ever produced. :)
I'd have quoted these (in full) too, though. For the graphics question.
Quote:Ragnar Tørnquist: Technology needn't get in the way of storytelling unless we focus too much on showing off our cool new shaders and particle effects and not enough on establishing an emotional connection with the player. Technology can definitely facilitate for better storytelling. The best visual stories are just that--visual. There's that whole "show, don't tell" rule which has often fallen by the wayside because of technology; The Longest Journey, which I wrote, was definitely an example of that. Mostly everything had to be communicated through dialogues. The more we can show, and thus allow players to figure out for themselves, the better. And nowhere is that more apparent than with human characters. Things like facial expressions and body language enable us to communicate the story in a massively different fashion, making it much more immediate and personal than what's been possible before.
It needs to be more than a gimmick, however. We need technology that fuels the narrative and the gameplay, and not the other way around. Just because we can do something doesn't mean we should do it. We're still at a gee-whiz stage where every new technological innovation is tossed in there, because gamers will love it. And they do! Hell, I love big explosions as much as the next guy. But we have to look at the technology as a tool, as a means to an end, and not an end in itself.
... but then I want to quote all of the other four replies too... all five of them make good points worth listening to!
Quote:Q: How do you think technology facilitates storytelling in games? How do you think technology gets in the way of the storytelling?
Chris Avellone: Absolutely technology facilitates storytelling. It adds the wonder and the action to the story, and it's the means by which the player perceives and controls his in-game personality. There are all sorts of events and wonders you can describe solely with a text story, but without the technology, animation, and a powerfully presented world, it's just going to be a bunch of text. You can only describe your encounter with a giant dragon, flying across the world in a giant airship, or using a gravity gun to fire saw blades at your enemies in so many words without the technology to back it up.
I don't think technology has ever gotten in the way of storytelling, and I think Infocom games are the proof of that. Even as simple as they seemed to be, as long as text could be presented on the screen, you could bring across a powerful story experience even without graphics or a 3D engine. I guess in the end, I think technology can only enhance the story experience (facial animations, voice acting, animations, fully realized world, scripted reactive elements, physics-based engines, etc.).
Hideo Kojima: I don't think storytelling and technology are related in any way. Detailed expressions (including facial expressions) and gestures make it easier to show subtle emotions, but this has nothing to do with storytelling.
"Technology can get in the way of storytelling by giving us really cool digital actors to work with, and suddenly (and I'm guilty of this) we think we're Spielberg."
Ken Levine: More technology equals more simulation. More simulation equals more emergence. Emergent experiences are the key to gameplay storytelling. Check out Grand Theft Auto III. What's great about that game? The cutscenes? Sure, they're well written, but is that what you remember? Or are they really the context for the unique action that each player experiences? Like the time you were being pursued by the Haitian gang and took your motorcycle off a ramp, crossing the river and watching the other bangers crash into the river behind you? That moment was never specifically scripted, but it was enabled by the story, which set it up and gave it context.
Technology can get in the way of storytelling by giving us really cool digital actors to work with, and suddenly (and I'm guilty of this) we think we're Spielberg. Face it, no game developer has the chops of a great film director, and no game character is going to emote like Brando. We've got different strengths and weaknesses.
Tim Schafer: Well, technology helps make the experience more and more immersive to more people. Previously you would have to have quite a good imagination to turn, say, the words of Zork into a real world in your head. But now people who don't have that much imagination can still fall into fantasy worlds because of the increased "realism" of the presentation. But as that gets closer and closer to real, the parts where it's missing (facial expressions, etc) become more and more glaring.
Definitely a great article and well worth reading. I don't agree with everything, such as the thing about game stories... sure, most games don't have great stories. True. But is it really as bad as some of them suggest? I'd be more inclined to agree with Tornquist or Avellone than Kojima or Levine on that one.