Blog 7
Game: The Banner Saga
Q1: Of the key narrative elements discussed so far in the course (interactivity, level design/linearity, moral choice/non-linearity, character), which do you think is the most prominent, important or interesting in your chosen game?
For this blog I have decided to return Banner Saga, a game I have previously played and enjoyed. Of the key narrative elements that we have discussed this term I feel that most of them are done to good quality in this game. But which is the most prominent, important or interesting. At this stage I think that the characters are the most prominent, important and interesting. Why do I think this? This is very much a character driven story, as I said in the previous post on this the issue of morality and what the player does can be considered but only for minor things. When it comes to the central, core story the player can only watch as the characters play through the dialogue. As such, "Andrew Burn argues, they play a dual role as both player agent and fictional character, belonging simultaneously to the "Ludic" and "Representational" systems that comprise the game."(The Routledge Companion to Video Game Studies, 2013, Jessica Aldred) I think that what Andrew Burn states has relevance to this game because it really does a large portion of both character and player moments. the biggest being at the end when you decide who takes the arrow out of 'Rook' or 'Alette'. This is such an important moment as far as characters go because they are two of the most important characters in the game and now you have to decide which one dies. I feel as though the characters are well developed and they all have something to give to the story, for example, I felt that 'Rook' was brave and caring, whilst 'Alette' is scared and uncertain, 'Hakon' is stern and fierce, while 'Ludin' is spoilt and bossy. All of these characters serve something to the game, "there is a universal mythological structure underlying good and popular stories, and the Hero's Journey is the
most useful way to get at that structure and use it to create new stories."(Into the Woods: A Practical Guide to the Hero's Journey, Bob Bates, 2005) I think that as we follow this non-linear story of different groups with their different characters it is easy to see that each group and even each character follows this concept of a 'Hero's Journey'.The design of the characters works really well with the style of the game the 2d animated fights and the 2d background provides and interesting change in a market that I think is being over-saturated in one style 3d animation. On another note, the fact that most of the dialogue is done through text is no problem at all. This in fact fits with the concept of Alette stitching the journey into the banner, its as if its a big story being told through pictures and writing in a book.
In conclusion I think that character is the most most prominent piece of this puzzle because of, design, character and player choices, hero's journey and because the player agent and the fictional character meld together so well to create a complete story and an enjoyable game.
Showing posts with label Interactive Narrative. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Interactive Narrative. Show all posts
Thursday, 7 April 2016
Sunday, 3 April 2016
03/04/16- Blogwk6
Blog
Week; 6
Game: Wing Commander 3
Q: How is narrative developed through character interactions?
Characters and how they push the narrative along in any form of media including games is becoming increasingly more important as the quality of games increases. For example 'The Walking Dead' series relies on how the characters interact with each other to form the story. I thought that this was very similar with 'Wing Commander 3'. The difference between these two is the 'The Walking Dead' gives you a much more vast selection with which you decide what your character does ion the game giving them a similar identity. But in many video games "character may take on strong, fictional identities that are recognizably separate from those of their players." Because 'Wing Commander' is all acted with little input from the player the characters performance is almost set in stone making the character interactions, I thought, so much more important for pushing the narrative along. As you follow Mark Hamill's character around the rooms of the ship we get to select who and what he interacts with. I felt that you had no choice but to interact with the other character sin the available conversations, which further validates my point about interactions being so much more important in this type of game. When your characters interact in this game it does occasionally give you an two choices of dialogue to reply to a question asked by the other person. This does offer some variation to the interaction. However as far as the greater game goes I feel that this does not have an overwhelming impact on how it plays out as the set in stone dialogue seems to be the driving force of the story.
Week; 6
Game: Wing Commander 3
Q: How is narrative developed through character interactions?
Characters and how they push the narrative along in any form of media including games is becoming increasingly more important as the quality of games increases. For example 'The Walking Dead' series relies on how the characters interact with each other to form the story. I thought that this was very similar with 'Wing Commander 3'. The difference between these two is the 'The Walking Dead' gives you a much more vast selection with which you decide what your character does ion the game giving them a similar identity. But in many video games "character may take on strong, fictional identities that are recognizably separate from those of their players." Because 'Wing Commander' is all acted with little input from the player the characters performance is almost set in stone making the character interactions, I thought, so much more important for pushing the narrative along. As you follow Mark Hamill's character around the rooms of the ship we get to select who and what he interacts with. I felt that you had no choice but to interact with the other character sin the available conversations, which further validates my point about interactions being so much more important in this type of game. When your characters interact in this game it does occasionally give you an two choices of dialogue to reply to a question asked by the other person. This does offer some variation to the interaction. However as far as the greater game goes I feel that this does not have an overwhelming impact on how it plays out as the set in stone dialogue seems to be the driving force of the story.
Friday, 25 March 2016
25/03/16-Interactive media_blog_week5
Interactive Narrative
Blog: 4
Week: 5
Game: The Wolf Among Us
Q: Do the choices you make in the game contribute to the sense of meaningful interactive moments?
'The Wolf Among Us' Provides the player with the interactivity style common to the telltale games. But how do the choices the player makes contribute to this interactivity. I though that because this game doesn't actually have the sort of interactivity from games with a lot of player control, but of sorts the choices the player makes still effects the interactive moments.
A later choice in the first chapter of the game is where you go first. Do you go to Mr Toad's apartment or Lawrence's apartment? If you choose Mr Toad's, Lawrence will die but if you choose Lawrence's you are given the opportunity to save him. This contributes to any interactive moment afterwards because as a player you feel these things are now happening because of the choice you just made. From 'Storyplaying' (Sebastian Domsch, 2013), "Choice situations can be either a-temporal or have a temporal dimension, which means that there might be a limited amount of time during which the options are available, or that - after a finite amount of time - not making any choices will produce an outcome that is different from the choice situation and that therefore constitutes a choice in itself." This passage is relevant to your choice if you select Lawrence's apartment. Because as you hide in the closet from the burglar you are given the option to charge out and save Lawrence or do nothing. If you do nothing the option available disappears and it is as if you have a made a choice. This also applies to the many combat scenes you encounter throughout the game. Choices appear on the screen but if you choose to do nothing the scene continues on in a different way compared to if you had chosen the option on screen.
Basically the options you see on screen from the dialogue, to the combat, and to the general run out of the closet choices, it feels like meaningful interactivity because of what the player can assume will happen from each choice. If the player can get a rough image in their minds of what will happen if they chose this or that it makes the interactivity meaningful.
Blog: 4
Week: 5
Game: The Wolf Among Us
Q: Do the choices you make in the game contribute to the sense of meaningful interactive moments?
'The Wolf Among Us' Provides the player with the interactivity style common to the telltale games. But how do the choices the player makes contribute to this interactivity. I though that because this game doesn't actually have the sort of interactivity from games with a lot of player control, but of sorts the choices the player makes still effects the interactive moments.
A later choice in the first chapter of the game is where you go first. Do you go to Mr Toad's apartment or Lawrence's apartment? If you choose Mr Toad's, Lawrence will die but if you choose Lawrence's you are given the opportunity to save him. This contributes to any interactive moment afterwards because as a player you feel these things are now happening because of the choice you just made. From 'Storyplaying' (Sebastian Domsch, 2013), "Choice situations can be either a-temporal or have a temporal dimension, which means that there might be a limited amount of time during which the options are available, or that - after a finite amount of time - not making any choices will produce an outcome that is different from the choice situation and that therefore constitutes a choice in itself." This passage is relevant to your choice if you select Lawrence's apartment. Because as you hide in the closet from the burglar you are given the option to charge out and save Lawrence or do nothing. If you do nothing the option available disappears and it is as if you have a made a choice. This also applies to the many combat scenes you encounter throughout the game. Choices appear on the screen but if you choose to do nothing the scene continues on in a different way compared to if you had chosen the option on screen.
Basically the options you see on screen from the dialogue, to the combat, and to the general run out of the closet choices, it feels like meaningful interactivity because of what the player can assume will happen from each choice. If the player can get a rough image in their minds of what will happen if they chose this or that it makes the interactivity meaningful.
Friday, 18 March 2016
18/03/16-week3Blog
Game:The Banner Saga
Blog: 3
Q3: How does morality influence the choices you make in the game?
Morality is an interesting part of games. As a person who games on a daily basis I have come across choices that bring my morality into play. Why I find morality interesting in games is because I know where I stand on the spectrum of moral choices and what I would choose in reality, so when I play games I often find myself actively doing the opposite of what I would actually do. In The Bana Saga I feel that the 2d environments and simple gameplay are not immersive enough for me, so I constantly feel detached from the game and thus am certain to do unrealistic decisions. An example from the game is during a journey from one city to another and a drunkard jeopardized the caravan and so as the leader I was given a few choices; beat the man, Ban him from alcohol, separate him from everyone else or banish him. I know morally banning him from alcohol is the right thing to do because he stays safe and so does the caravan but I banish him knowing that he will surely die in the frozen tundras. Perhaps if the game was 3d or on an oculus I may feel enough for he characters that I make decisions I would make in real life but that's not The Bane Saga. A passage (from 'Ethical dilemmas and dominant moral strategies in games' by Brandon Perdue) I really felt fit with the example above was "The idea of a moral choice often runs directly counter to the tendency of many players to make the optimal moves in the game." Basically the situation with the drunkard was I could take the strategic path and toss him meaning he could no longer cause future problems for the camp which may or may not have been very bad, or only slightly punishing him keeping my conscience clean but having that decision later on being bad for everyone else. Basically strategic decisions conflict with moral decisions and it's up to the player if they want the game to be easier or harder depending on what choice they make.
So I think morality can influence the players decisions but if the game is not immersive enough the player will often be detached enough to influence his own decision making even if it goes against his/her own moral standards.
Blog: 3
Q3: How does morality influence the choices you make in the game?
Morality is an interesting part of games. As a person who games on a daily basis I have come across choices that bring my morality into play. Why I find morality interesting in games is because I know where I stand on the spectrum of moral choices and what I would choose in reality, so when I play games I often find myself actively doing the opposite of what I would actually do. In The Bana Saga I feel that the 2d environments and simple gameplay are not immersive enough for me, so I constantly feel detached from the game and thus am certain to do unrealistic decisions. An example from the game is during a journey from one city to another and a drunkard jeopardized the caravan and so as the leader I was given a few choices; beat the man, Ban him from alcohol, separate him from everyone else or banish him. I know morally banning him from alcohol is the right thing to do because he stays safe and so does the caravan but I banish him knowing that he will surely die in the frozen tundras. Perhaps if the game was 3d or on an oculus I may feel enough for he characters that I make decisions I would make in real life but that's not The Bane Saga. A passage (from 'Ethical dilemmas and dominant moral strategies in games' by Brandon Perdue) I really felt fit with the example above was "The idea of a moral choice often runs directly counter to the tendency of many players to make the optimal moves in the game." Basically the situation with the drunkard was I could take the strategic path and toss him meaning he could no longer cause future problems for the camp which may or may not have been very bad, or only slightly punishing him keeping my conscience clean but having that decision later on being bad for everyone else. Basically strategic decisions conflict with moral decisions and it's up to the player if they want the game to be easier or harder depending on what choice they make.
So I think morality can influence the players decisions but if the game is not immersive enough the player will often be detached enough to influence his own decision making even if it goes against his/her own moral standards.
Thursday, 10 March 2016
InteractiveNarrativeBlogWeek2-11/03
Blog 2
Game: Prince of Persia The Sands of Time
Q1: Did linear storytelling in your chosen game engage and excite you as a player? Explain why or why not?
Linear storytelling in games is based around the idea of 'causal logic'. So the actions of the player leads to cut scenes, and those cut scenes lead to more game play. In games, game play supports story and story supports game play. Along with the standard 'string of pearls' formula, there were extra little segments during the game play which keep you focused on the story and objective of the character, for example when you enter a new area the game has cinematic shots to show you the objective or destination and enemies.I think that the game did well to create a linear story where the cut scenes and game play work well enough together to create an engaging and exciting experience.
However I was not completely engaged and excited because the story was to linear, I had to follow a carefully laid out path, fight enemies and go through rooms in a very set order. This for me creates a less engaging game as I feel less meaningful to the story and I don't have as much illusion of choice. Games are about "The satisfying power to take meaningful action and see the results of our decisions and choices",(Janet Murray, Hamlet on the Holodeck, 126) unfold before us, when the game misses that effect the player feels a detachment from the game. A game can have set cut scenes, but I think at the very least the player needs to be able to experience different pathways to that cut scene each play through.
Game: Prince of Persia The Sands of Time
Q1: Did linear storytelling in your chosen game engage and excite you as a player? Explain why or why not?
Linear storytelling in games is based around the idea of 'causal logic'. So the actions of the player leads to cut scenes, and those cut scenes lead to more game play. In games, game play supports story and story supports game play. Along with the standard 'string of pearls' formula, there were extra little segments during the game play which keep you focused on the story and objective of the character, for example when you enter a new area the game has cinematic shots to show you the objective or destination and enemies.I think that the game did well to create a linear story where the cut scenes and game play work well enough together to create an engaging and exciting experience.
However I was not completely engaged and excited because the story was to linear, I had to follow a carefully laid out path, fight enemies and go through rooms in a very set order. This for me creates a less engaging game as I feel less meaningful to the story and I don't have as much illusion of choice. Games are about "The satisfying power to take meaningful action and see the results of our decisions and choices",(Janet Murray, Hamlet on the Holodeck, 126) unfold before us, when the game misses that effect the player feels a detachment from the game. A game can have set cut scenes, but I think at the very least the player needs to be able to experience different pathways to that cut scene each play through.
Thursday, 3 March 2016
Interactiveweek1Blog-04/03/16
Game: Facade
Question: Does your chosen game make user input feel meaningful in terms of story direction and progression? Why or why not?
What I got from the first time I played Facade is that it is an interactive drama which you get thrown into and you are a long time friend of a married couple who are clearly having problems.
Given that this game does have many different outcomes for the story it is very clear that user input does have some sort of meaningful input into the progression of the story. I played the game through to a finish around 5 times and it ended differently each time, for example first play through ended with me being kicked out by Trip, second play through had Trip leave, third play through had Grace leave, fourth play through had them stay together, fifth time had stay together but under different circumstances. What happens depends on multiple things. Key words seem to work well with what the AI does, but at the same time, some words don't seem to compute with the AI. With the story I feel as though it often does try to go to the same point but all we can do as players is delay and direct it to that point. They all ways seem to talk about the same things but just in a different order.
The game heavily relies on the capabilities of the AI and I don't feel that it delivers for the story, because they kept getting stuck in loops (or just stuck) and glitching out. Regardless of this I do feel that the user does still feel meaningful because the user is directly choosing what to type in response to the questions and providing the AI gives a reply the user must feel some sort of interaction on a personal level.
Question: Does your chosen game make user input feel meaningful in terms of story direction and progression? Why or why not?
What I got from the first time I played Facade is that it is an interactive drama which you get thrown into and you are a long time friend of a married couple who are clearly having problems.
Given that this game does have many different outcomes for the story it is very clear that user input does have some sort of meaningful input into the progression of the story. I played the game through to a finish around 5 times and it ended differently each time, for example first play through ended with me being kicked out by Trip, second play through had Trip leave, third play through had Grace leave, fourth play through had them stay together, fifth time had stay together but under different circumstances. What happens depends on multiple things. Key words seem to work well with what the AI does, but at the same time, some words don't seem to compute with the AI. With the story I feel as though it often does try to go to the same point but all we can do as players is delay and direct it to that point. They all ways seem to talk about the same things but just in a different order.
The game heavily relies on the capabilities of the AI and I don't feel that it delivers for the story, because they kept getting stuck in loops (or just stuck) and glitching out. Regardless of this I do feel that the user does still feel meaningful because the user is directly choosing what to type in response to the questions and providing the AI gives a reply the user must feel some sort of interaction on a personal level.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)