Audience and Story continued
Last week I wrote a post about story design in games and that relationship to transmedia. My argument was essentially that while there is certainly a place for the kinds of games that want you to completely construct your own story, like Skyrim (or perhaps more to the point, Minecraft), I think there will always also be a place for more structured or linear narratives like those found in games like Dragon Age.
I had some great comments there, and Simon Pulman wrote a full response on his blog. I also had an interesting conversation with Brian Clark about reader-response criticism, that all stories should be evaluated as essentially the audience’s regardless of authorial intent — which is fair enough, but there’s nonetheless a spectrum of how much control an “author” tried to put on a story, from deliberately making an open sandbox to, say, a novel.
I also suggested that transmedia may be a good way to have the best of both worlds — a way to have a story that is designed to be constructed by the experiencer, as well as a story with more structure and authorial intent. [My language here is imperfect, as even a novel should be designed with the experience of the audience in mind. Nonetheless, I hope you see the difference in what I'm saying.]
I then saw this article, which describes how game designer David Jaffe argues that games shouldn’t try to tell a linear, movie-like story, because that’s not what they’re good at.
But Jaffe did argue vociferously against “games that have been intentionally made from the ground up with the intent and purpose of telling a story or expressing a philosophy or giving a designer’s narrative.” Because no matter how hard we want to fight it, Jaffe said, games just aren’t meant for this kind of storytelling.
… [I]n chasing movies, games lose something that’s unique to the medium, Jaffe said. The biggest successes in video games—titles like Modern Warfare‘s multiplayer, Skyrim, Guitar Hero, and Angry Birds, make a huge impact without ever pushing a developer-driven story on the player. The game industry should respect the success we’ve had in entertaining the world, he argued, and stop trying to force more from what has historically been the worst medium for expressing complex narrative ideas.
… In other words, if you think you have something significant to say about philosophy or human nature, stick with the media that have proven they’re suited to imparting that message effectively.
I still disagree — I think a developer-driven story can mesh well with interesting gameplay and player freedom (I point towards the Final Fantasy series as what I think is a good example, or again something like Dragon Age (which I started playing this weekend) which has fairly linear overarching storyline that you can nonetheless explore in a pretty open way), just like any game of D&D.
(Furthermore, I think saying we shouldn’t try to include any kind of theme or philosophy or argument in a game is to fail as a creator.)
But it does raise a question for me, regarding transmedia — is transmedia only really good if it involves significant audience participation, if it allows the audience to drive the narrative and create the structure? Is a project that delivers a more linear story by nature inferior because it’s not living up to what the medium (transmedia) is best at?
I admit something of a personal concern in this — Azrael’s Stop for instance was never meant to be highly participatory, but I still consider it transmedia (though it has always been an “experiment” first and foremost, and whether or not it’s labelled as transmedia isn’t so important to me). But I also have a bias towards even video games and D&D games that have a driving storyline that I give myself over to. So I wonder again — is there room for both?
You tell me.
Mike Pynn:
February 13th, 2012 at 11:03 am
Some stories and some characters are better suited to passive experiences than interactive ones. Similarly, I think some are better suited to transmedia experiences than others. Interacting with characters through the same media I use to interact with my friends and family allows me to understand them in a crazy, cool way. It’s very different from how I might understand them if I watched from a seat in a movie theater or in a weekly installment on television.
Good design is key to harmony between games and stories, in my view. Keep your characters where they belong, and I think there’ll be plenty of room for everyone to play nicely (or not so nicely, if you like Jaffe’s Twisted Metal games).
Steele Filipek:
February 13th, 2012 at 1:51 pm
As a writer, co-writer, and editor of several video game scripts, I’m hardly the most objective source for an opinion on this matter. As a gamer since childhood, however, I do have a dog in this fight. Video games, as an art form, will evolve based on the tastes of creators and consumers. Gamers are getting to change the future of this medium simply by affecting the way titles are created, just as filmgoers shifted the dialogue of film by the overwhelming numbers that saw Jaws (creating the summer blockbuster). Video games twenty and thirty years down the road will be similarly affected by the choices we all make today.
So, then, for my thoughts…
On one hand, I dislike when video games try to “ape” cinema. Jamming in and out of gameplay for cut scenes creates an awkward, herky-jerky feel that ruins the illusion of the gaming world just as much as clunky controls. It’s sometimes necessary: with a few exceptions, games have yet to handle social interactions in such a way that makes them feel compelling enough to include in gameplay beyond basic options. Gamers usually resent this “forced focus” as heavy-handed, particularly when it’s unskippable or, worse yet, boring. Modern creators have now grown up with video games for their entire lives and so can reach to them for inspiration, but film is still a powerful influence on popular culture.
For their part, filmmakers have tried to recreate game mechanics for years with mixed results (Cloverfield’s POV is a cleverly masked first-person-shooter, while the movie version of Doom left all pretext behind). Why mixed? Because people play video games to become immersed in a world. Film’s greatest strength is forcing people to sit through moments of tension, be it comedic or horrific. Filmgoers relish these moving snapshots of truth. The silver screen is the dividing line between the real world and fantasy.
Gamers, on the other hand, wish to manipulate the world around them. It is a completely different form of storytelling. Now that technology has caught up to creators’ visions, we seesome of that movement happening… in baby-steps. Video games (along with emerging social media platforms) do have a revolutionary ability to tell non-linear stories. It would be a shame to waste this potential.
Yet…
At the same time, a well-told linear story still goes a long way. Valve has done a spectacular job creating these kinds of tales (Portal 2 was one of the best-selling games of 2011, for instance) while also creating games that have no concrete story (Team Fortress 2). Bioware has also crafted almost a dozen titles with the same focus on storytelling: few people bought Dragon Age or Mass Effect for the game mechanics alone. True, these titles did allow for customization of story, it was still done in a linear fashion. Hero wants something, obstacle is in the way, hero overcomes said obstacle or else fails in the attempt. It’s the same basic template for all stories, except in the video game medium, the player is the hero.
What does this suggest to me? There’s enough room at the table for everything, particularly with video games out-selling Hollywood films (in theatre only). Indie gaming is becoming larger as costs decrease, fueling the radical departures necessary to sustain the art form in the future. Interestingly but not surprisingly, the mainstream industry has focused on another Hollywood-ism that most people decry: popular but derivative sequels. Innovation is and always will be key in a media so heavily reliant on technology, but there will always be people who want a good story told to them.
That is the final part of the puzzle. These stories have to be told well. Gamers are willing to forgive a lot if they are invested in the gameplay, or, to a lesser degree, the story. Like sequential art (comic books), things only become truly transcendent when the two parts of the whole (visuals/mechanics and story) harmonize. Such series as Zelda and Half-Life have emerged and thrived because of their ability
And now, finally, to transmedia…
Transmedia is in its infancy as an art form. It would be a mistake to pattern its growth after video games despite the similarities between the two media. At its core, the only tenet is that the story is told across multiple media platforms. The strengths of this are audience participation, of course, but it is not a requirement for true success. The creators at Fourth Wall Studios have created both forms. I doubt that there is any consensus on the “true” path of transmedia because no two transmedia producers completely agree as to what that path is. To modify an old joke, two producers have three opinions on the matter.
That’s the exciting part, however. Like video game producers, we are creating the art form from the ground up. Linear stories, non-linear stories, or stories that are neither are being told right now by people around the world. We should utilize the strengths of the meta-platform as well as we manage the individual platforms upon which we tell our tales. So, write your stories however you see fit. The worlds we create will only come alive if they emerge from the heart.
Lucas J.W. Johnson:
February 13th, 2012 at 2:01 pm
Right, so, that’s pretty much exactly my thoughts, yes.
If nothing else, different people like different things from their entertainment, as audience, and from their creations, as creators. And importantly, there’s a lot of overlap — people can like a ‘linear’ story and also video game mechanics. I know I do.
Thanks for the awesome response, Steele.
Hilary Sierpinski:
February 13th, 2012 at 5:17 pm
I write middle-grade fiction and I’d have to say both. Designer Stephen Dinehart in his TEDxTransmedia talk DAREtoENGAGE described Transmedia storytelling as “classical storytelling squared.” This resonated with me because I do believe a story can encourage active participation while providing a core narrative with a distinctive, authorial voice. I think one of the biggest challenges facing the publishing industry is a lack of willingness to bend any aspect of a story to the will of the audience. In this new, expansive storytelling landscape, authors and publishers have to rethink the proprietary relationship they have to both the characters and the worlds they create. Two great posts, lots to think about here.
Lucas J.W. Johnson:
February 13th, 2012 at 5:40 pm
Thanks for the comment, Hilary! The publishing industry definitely has a lot to figure out, from where I’m sitting, and as an aspiring YA writer as well, I hope to do a lot of interesting things where book meets audience.
N.L:
February 15th, 2012 at 6:53 am
Transmedia stories should create the option for participation, but not require it. I think if a story only makes sense to a reader/viewer/player if they have participated in some way it is a failure. It should be complete on it’s own as well.
Recommended Transmedia Reading 2/15/12 | Transmythology.com:
February 15th, 2012 at 7:22 am
[...] Audience and the Story Continued – Silverstring Media [...]
Siobhan O'Flynn:
February 15th, 2012 at 7:57 am
Great comments above! & thanks Steele for such a full response which I would second.
My footnote re. participatory media/strategies? I remind myself that these have evolved in response to the massive uptake in social media & online engagement via multiple new platforms. The size of potential audiences/communities on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube etc and the low cost of putting content teasers on these platforms is driving the uptake in participatory strategies in transmedia design.. So totally agree with the argument that transmedia is evolving & we don’t know what it will look like 5 years from now.
My big think of late is that media conglomerates producing content (transmedia/cross-platform) are now forced to be reactive – what’s the latest platform? Oh! today it’s Pinterest! How can we use it? What can we do with it? And that’s the big wild card that industries in the last century didn’t have to contend with.
today’s 2 cents!
thachr = sara thacher » How Interactive Should Transmedia Be?:
February 22nd, 2012 at 7:14 am
[...] about your chosen platforms guide the amount of interactivity in your transmedia project.Lately, Lucas Johnson and several other people have been writing about big narrative story lines being delivered through [...]