This week we talked about environmental storytelling and the importance of showing rather than saying. While it’s true that many games tell their stories through extensive cutscenes, dialogue, and lore, some games put the story in the back seat, and let the player find the story themselves. During class, we looked at the games “Half Life 2” and “Firewatch” as examples of narrative architecture, with both of these games having a blend of narrative in dialogue and narrative architecture. Both of these games have masterfully designed maps that aid the story beautifully, helping with world building and telling the player so much about the game without saying anything. A good example of this blend in storytelling comes from another game made by Valve, “Portal 2”. The Portal series is a puzzle game series that was built in the Source engine, the same engine in which “Half Life 2” was built in, and features a world much different from the world of the Half Life series. The setting of the first “Portal” is an underground lab known as Aperture Laboratories, a sleek white series of chambers with puzzles built by the facilities AI overseer, GLaDOS. The game does not tell you much, other than that you are a test subject in GLaDOS’ lab, and that you must work towards the reward of cake (which turns out to be a fiery furnace in which GLaDOS tries to kill you, but to no avail). After seemingly destroying GLaDOS and escaping to the surface world at the end of the first “Portal”, “Portal 2” begins with the player back in a holding chamber in the lab. This chamber is modeled after a regular hotel room, but keeps the player character, Chell, in cryostasis until she is needed for testing again. It is revealed that Chell has been in this chamber for an extraodinarily long time (the exact time is never revealed, as the chamber states “You have been asleep for: 99999” before cutting out) before being broken out by an Aperture Core named Wheatley. Whaetley comes to player claiming that he needs help breaking out of the facility. When you first leave your chamber, you see that the facility has become run down without a robot AI keeping it efficient and clean. Everything is on the brink of collapse, nature has begun to reclaim parts of the chambers, and the sleek white walls have been dirtied by the sands of time. After accidentally reawakening GLaDOS, Wheatley and Chell are separated, and GLaDOS goes back to her old ways, using you for tests. Almost immediately, GLaDOS begins removing the trash from the labs and rebuilds test chambers with the old white walls from the first game. It is a return to normalcy, but it comes as a bit unwelcome in the context of the events of the first game and the second game up to this point. Once GLaDOS is defeated once again with the help of Wheatley, Wheatley is installed into the main control center of the lab. GLaDOS then reveals that Wheatley was an “intelligence dampening core”, made by Aperture scientists in an attempt to “slow her down” and “feed her bad ideas through the voice inside her head”. Wheatley becomes so enraged by being called an imbecile, that he literally pushes you down to the old Aperture labs, which was below the Aperture labs that GLaDOS had built the whole time, forgotten by time (and intentionally by GLaDOS). This Aperture is much less sleek, looking and feeling much older, using more primitive and dangerous technology, and reflecting the period of the crumbling company. As a last hope, Aperture scientists scraped together they could to attempt to save the founder’s life, Cave Johnson. Cave Johnson’s last request, however, was that they use his life saving AI upload on his assistant first, a girl named Caroline. GLaDOS then remembers her past, and becomes more sympathetic towards Chell. When you return to the original lab, you find that Wheatley has turned it upside down with his terrible ideas. For one, he neglects to cool the nuclear core of the lab, causing it to slowly melt. This is also reflected in the scattered buttons and walls of Wheatley’s test chambers. In addition, Wheatley creates cube hybrids with the game’s turrets, creating growling, walking abominations. Lastly, Wheatley attempts to kill Chell and GLaDOS, making it quite obvious that he is going to do so, and designing poorly designed traps.

I think this game is an excellent example of narrative architecture, and how a story can be driven by your surroundings. Not only is the environment imperative to solving puzzles, but it tells an entire story in itself, of a scientific facility slowly losing its way.

                 I feel that narrative is something that many people confuse with the idea of a “story,” which isn’t wrong. In Henry Jenkins’ Game Design as Narrative Architecture, he states that “narrative analysis need not be prescriptive” and that “many games do have narrative aspirations.”  The first quote is something I would relate to people who believe that narrative is something that in is a 1:1 relation to story and spoken dialogue. Again, this isn’t necessarily wrong but there is so much more to narrative than just what is explicitly told to us in games. Much of the world building, the background information, and even the context of the events of the game can contribute to what narrative is. “If some games tell stories, they are unlikely to tell them in the same ways that other media tell stories. Stories are not empty content that can be ported from one media pipeline to the next.” This is something that I feel is especially true for games; an action roleplaying game has its own way of telling its story through dialogue and cutscenes, while a shooter might do it do mission briefings and descriptions.

                 If I remember correctly Mejeur’s PLASMA presentation, her definition of narrative was simple a means to an end of progressing the story, something to move the story along. Translated into a game, that can be as simple as something like ‘turning the page’ or ‘selecting the next level.’ In ‘Rainbow Six Siege,’ a shooter game, the narrative might be the character bios, or the situational context of each round, or the overarching theme of the events, or even simply the act of defeating the enemy team. But that is something that people may be confused simply by the fact that in the game, there isn’t a driven story. Something like the game Half Life 2 would be a textbook definition of a game with a story driven narrative, with exploration and important dialogue explaining the story to the player. Jenkins’ also mentions that “the experience of playing video games can never be simply reduced to the experience of a story.” Simplifying the narrative of a game to just the story ignores many other aspects of a video game that might contribute to the broader definition of game narrative. Game state, game population, or even, something I feel is most important to game narrative, us the players.

                Sources

Jenkins, Henry. “Game Design as Narrative Architecture.” Electronic Book Review

I agree with the idea that one of the most important things within a game is the development of the environment.  The environment in which a game takes place is central to convincing the player that they are transported into a new world.  Environments within a game adds context to the overarching narrative. Within the article “Game Design as Narrative Architecture”, Henry Jenkins describes the importance of spatial stories and environmental storytelling.  In the article he discusses “what ways the structuring of game space facilitates different kinds of narrative experiences” (Jenkins). When I think of environmental storytelling I think of Dead Space.  The environment of Dead Space is arguable the most important part of the game.  It takes place in a ship in space that is infested with these creatures called necromorphs.  This game is supposed to evoke feelings of fear and loneliness.  The ship is damaged and painted with the blood of the people on the ship. There are bodies and documents that paint an image of events that must have taken place before you got there.  It gives the player the illusion of a bigger world with events taking place all around them.  Without the environment, the narrative itself might not be able to tell the story of the game in a convincing way. The game wouldn’t be what it is today. I believe it wouldn’t be nearly as scary or successful.  One statement I completely agree with is, “Environmental storytelling creates the preconditions for an immersive narrative experience” (Jenkins).  The only way to truly immerse the character into a narrative is to surround them with a believable environment. An environment that enriches the main plot of a story, and even enhances it or enlarges it.  I think that it is interesting if the environment encourages different narratives that are separate from the main narrative.  The environment of a game could even be used to develop side narratives that don’t have anything to do with the main story but encourages players to venture off and find these subtle easter eggs.  Obviously not all games need an environment in order to be a good game, but for those that are building a larger game world I feel that putting extra time into the story of the space is essential for success.

Works Cited

Jenkins, Henry. “Game Design as Narrative Architecture.” (2003).

 

 

The design of narrative in games has always had a different feel for me than how narrative is designed for other fictional media. I feel that while other fictional mediums tend to put the story as the most important piece to tell, many games instead emphasize the setting as equally or more important than the story. Worldbuilding in games tend to follow different practices from traditional fictional media.

This seems to follow the idea of spatial stories and environmental storytelling, where the worldbuilding is more important than the narrative (Jenkins). In addition, the presentation of the worlds in these types of games tend to be more passive, where players need to actively talk to NPCs and interact with objects in the world in order to learn more about it. However, it is not necessary to interact with anything not essential to the story or to understand the world to reach the end of the game and essentially “beat the game.” Essentially, a large part of the worldbuilding serves to flavor the mechanics of the game. However, those who seek out to learn more of the world are rewarded by being active on their part. An example that I can think of is Pokemon, where the player’s main goal is to become the champion, and to defeat some of the evil teams along the way. However, there are also several side quests and post-game content that is not necessary for the player to control, but can if they so desire. A lot of the NPCs within the game also has some kind of unique dialogue that gives background to the settings in the game.

In some games with a more strictly linear narrative, they tend to feature only one path through the story, a lot of the background follows more traditional storytelling methods where the backgrounds are often given to the player. These seems to follow Jenkins’s idea of enacting stories, where the player can participate in performing and witnessing the story as if they were there. If it is a game where the player can move around in the world, the path that the player must take is largely fixed. However, the freedom that the player has in pacing out the reveal of story beats still gives a sense of exploration and freedom not allowed in other mediums. An example I can think of is Davey Wreden’s The Beginner’s Guide, which we played in class, where a large part of the narrative given to the player is linear, to the point that the narrator himself controls a lot of the player’s freedom over the game, such as making the player skip the maze. However, the player can still have freedom in pacing, such as if the player chooses to read all the comments in one of Coda’s games.

In class, we played Half Life 2, which uses a bit of both ideas. The player controlled character is able to freely move around and interact with characters to learn about the world. In addition, talking to important characters in the story does not prevent the player from continuing to freely move around. However, the game also has a set path that they must follow to access the next stage of the story.

Sources:

Jenkins, Henry. “Game Design as Narrative Architecture.” Electronic Book Review, 7 Oct. 2004, electronicbookreview.com/essay/game-design-as-narrative-architecture/.

An interesting topic that came up in class discussion based on this past week’s material was how different types of spaces in games create such unique experiences, particularly in horror games. Fullerton wrote in this week’s chapter, “As opposed to physical or mental obstacles and conflict from direct competition with other players, another type of game conflict can come from dilemma-based choices that players have to make” (pg 86). This made me think of how horror games make the player decide in their panic running from/trying to escape whatever evil is after them whether or not to stop and read the documents that essentially have the games entire storyline in them (which most people miss because they get too spooked and are just trying to survive). 

Additionally, I enjoyed Jenkin’s discussion of narrative in games and also related it to how horror typically operates in gaming spaces. On the topic of environmental storytelling and spatial narrative he writes, “they can provide a staging ground where narrative events are enacted; they may embed narrative information within their mise-en-scene; or they provide resources for emergent narratives” (Jenkins). This particularly made me think of one of my favorite narrative games, Layers of Fear. In this game, the player navigates an old house with a very unsettling and spooky environment. The architecture of the house makes no sense and sometimes you would walk out of s room just to walk into the same room but slightly different, or leave a room and realize it is not the same place in the house as where you had entered from. Eventually the house changes to a full-on fever dream space with doors opening to mile high drops and melting rooms. The point of this narratively, as the player slowly realizes throughout the game, was that you, as the player, were experiencing the memories of a painter who had descended into madness from his horrible past and guilt that was stuck wondering in his own home, doomed to repeat terrible memories in a terrifying manner forever. This type of story experience would not have been possible in regular film, and truly showed the narrative power that games can have. 

Works Cited:

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

Jenkins, Henry. Game Design as Narrative Architecture. 2004.

On Tuesday, we talked about Game Design as Narrative Architecture by Henry Jenkins and in fact, I get to experience some of the author’s concepts when we played The Beginner’s Guide , Half-Life 2, Firewatch and even on Thursday when we get to play the solo project games.

The author mentions that not all games have stories and I can see that in The Beginner’s Guide. In The Beginner’s Guide, the narrator talks about how most of Coda’s games have no stories in them, not to mention that they all seem to be unfinished. However, I do enjoy the game and the reason for that is because the narrator, Davey Wreden turns his relationship with Coda and all Coda’s games into a single work of art or game that has story in it. His relationship with Coda gives a lot of context to the game. Without it, Coda’s games have no stories in them, however it is good to note that they are still considered as games.

On the other hand, we also have games where the stories are huge parts of the games. For example, both Half-Life 2 and Firewatch use stories to appeal to our emotions or previous narrative experiences as Jenkins would describe it. I love how Firewatch uses flashbacks to give more backgrounds to the character you are playing. It gives this sense of solitude in the forest, showing that the character perhaps wants to be alone. Another example would be from today. I played this ladder-like board game that has a Pokemon theme in it. This is an example of evocative space in which as I play the game, all of my experiences related to Pokemon come back to me.

All of these are useful when it comes to prototyping or designing the game, which we talked about last week. When prototyping and designing a game, we should ask ourselves questions such as: Will there be a story in the game? Will it be the main part of it? Even in developing the story, we can use the concept we learnt from Mark Barrett’s speech. We should design the overall story in the beginning and make it more in depth and add more details as we progress.

Barrett, Mark. “Hitchhiker’s Guide to Rapid Prototypes!” GDC, YouTube, 6 September 2017.

Jenkins, Henry. “Game Design as Narrative Architecture”, Electronic Book Review, July 10, 2004, .

Last week we watched the “Hitchhiker’s Guide to Rapid Prototypes!” YouTube video by Mark Barrett on GDC. This video talks about what the processes are when it comes to prototyping and designing a game. It got me thinking about my own game design process and how I (try to) develop my solo project. 

There were a few slides that really stood out to me that I thought about during the development of the solo project. The first topic was how he defined rapid prototyping. In the slide that he presented, he showed two different ways to develop a car. One was by starting with a wheel, then adding axles, then a chassis, then a steering wheel. In that case, only the final piece was a viable product that can be used. The second way to develop a car was by first starting out with a skateboard, then adding a handle and turning it into a scooter, then adding pedals and a seat and turning it into a bicycle, then giving it a motor and turning it into a motorcycle, then giving it four wheels and turning it into a car. Each time the design was iterated on, it still kept its functionality. I felt like I applied this to my project by making every branching instance connect with each other and make sure that everything was connected before I added more detail to the stories. Once I had finished the main branch of my project, I began to iterate on it, creating more encounters, which meant more branches and more options that the player can choose.

Another topic that Barnett covered was the idea of a core diagram. A core diagram consists of the core mechanic, the secondary mechanic, progression and then the narrative. He used Pac-Man as an example, and said that the core mechanic of the game wasn’t to eat everything, but to move. I thought about what my project’s main mechanic would be and I think it would have to be reading. This is the mechanic that you spend the most time doing, while something like choosing dialog options is more of a secondary mechanic. The progression in my game is to get to the end of the story, while the narrative is the story itself and the experiences that you have while playing.

Sources:

Barrett, Mark. “Hitchhiker’s Guide to Rapid Prototypes!” GDC, YouTube, 6 September 2017.

In class on Tuesday, we discussed Henry Jenkins Game Design As Narrative Architecture.  One main point was that not all games tell stories.  The author makes a good point by thinking of games such as Tetris, where there isn’t really a story involved and it’s more of a manipulation of the graphics.  I agree with his statement, and it got me thinking about the games that I play that don’t tell a story.  I don’t play many single-player story games, but it had me wondering if games such as Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Siege which are mostly multiplayer tell stories.  I believe it’s a mixture of both, since a lot of the game is just teams shooting each other.  However, each operator has their own background story and their own abilities, which makes me wonder more about the story itself behind the game.  Even though there isn’t a specific plot, like there might be with a game such as Life Is Strange, it still has story aspects to it.  Regardless, Jenkins’ point that games don’t need stories to still be games persists in this case.

Jenkins also discussed enacted narratives.  In these cases, the story is mostly structured around the character’s movement through space.  The environment may also accelerate the plot in this case. Jenkins talks about “micronarratives”, which are “emotional attractions” such as cut scenes.  However, instead of a cut scene, the game could allow a player to do something in the story space so that they themself can see the interaction instead of just watching it without actually doing much to get to that point.  There is also a difference between a plot and a story; plot happens to be how a movie will display its narrative, whereas story is how we personally construct events that have happened in order. This reminded me of Firewatch and how the chronological events were all very out of order.  The main character was experiencing flashbacks of his time with his partner, Julia, while he was currently in the woods.  I liked the fact that the past was being told in the present, and intermittently between his flashbacks, we could see the peaceful environment of the world.

Jenkins, Henry. “Game Design as Narrative Architecture”, Electronic Book Review, July 10, 2004, https://electronicbookreview.com/essay/game-design-as-narrative-architecture/

After reading chapter 3: Working with Formal Elements from the textbook Game Design Workshop a Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, by Tracy Fullerton I did not think about how important a player counts could be for a game. Currently, I am making a board game for about three players. After reading the section Number of Players in chapter 3 I believe adding a couple more players to the game could make it more interesting and more unpredictable. Another section that caught my attention was the Player Interaction Patterns section. There are many kinds of player interactions such as single-player vs game, multiple individual players vs game, player vs player, unilateral competition, multilateral competition, cooperative play, and team competition. Even though all player interactions are great, I personally lean towards single player vs game and team competition. In a single-player vs game, you are playing against a computer and not an actual person. An example of a single-player vs game would be Pac Man and Solitaire. In team competitive games it is based on two or more groups who are competing against one another. An “example include[s] soccer, basketball, charades, Defense of Ancients, and Team Fortress 2” (Fullerton p. 64). Both of these player interactions are the opposite of one another and because of that, it makes them so great. Sometimes I get frustrated playing competitive games such as Call of Duty, Apex Legends, and Fifa 20, that I will play single-player games such as Pokémon, Zelda, or Animal Crossing to calm my mind. The same idea when I get bored of player single-player games, I would switch to a more competitive team-based game.

What makes video games unique is that there is a genre and player interaction for everyone. Currently, my friends want me to get into the Borderlands games, which can be a single-player and cooperative play. They always ask if I want to play cooperative with them and I usually say no. The reasoning why I do not usually play cooperative modes is because I believe if I am going to play online with friends, I simply want it to be against other human players. I believe the game would be more challenging and fun if you are facing real people rather than CPUs. I still think cooperative games are a great idea for players who want to play with friends and not having to worry about a competitive atmosphere.

Works Cited:

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

This week in class for DMS 462 we spoke about prototyping games. We were assigned to watch Mark Barrett’s speech on rapid prototyping. In the video Mark spoke about his first time being a part of a game jam. After his first game jam he really got into making prototypes for games which helped him work for a gaming company where he can improve on his skills through prototyping. I found it very interesting because prototyping is something that everyone does when coming up with something new or testing out a new way to do something. This goes into the activity we had in class, which was playing a steam game and showing our prototypes of our games to each other in class.

The game we played on steam is called The Beginner’s Guide. So in this game you just play through unfinished games that were made by the narrator’s partner. All the different games were unfinished prototypes that made you think about why he started it, why he stopped working on it, and what was the thought process while making it. That was something that I was trying to pay attention to as I played through a few of the games that were made. It was something that had me thinking for my prototype game and for others prototypes as well. We moved on and began to play my other classmates prototypes that they brought into class. There was one game that I played in a group of 5 including me. I was like a mixture of Apples to Apples and Cards Against Humanity. The prototype was actually pretty funny depending on the type of people you play with. One of the other guys showed me his prototype for his game that he is making on Twine just like me,  but his work was way more organized. My prototype just has one or two pages done, but I will be trying to take somethings from the other prototypes I played or saw and think about certain aspects of my game to see what needs or doesn’t need to be in the game.