net slum: re: demi's IM4
vael:
Now Demi, do you really think I could pull off such a ruse as a game design? You may remember in the beginning of my envisioning for game 3 that I said “stealing a soul in game 3 is different than in EBZ, because you would actually be doing it”. The fact you can even *actually* do anything is enough to be interested because it instantly adds that fact to the narrative. “I went there, and THEN I talked to the person.” Instead of clicking on the storylet that tells you you did. “Casing” a place to rob may not be too different from EBZ, but how could it be? How much do I develop just to, what, perhaps make casing a bit more interesting, when there’s pickpocketing, lockpicking, and arson available to the player?
As I said, RPGs are “raising bars” along to a storyline, and while some gameplay is just so damned interesting that you simply must continue playing, (see your latest addiction to final fantasy’s job system) I’m not creating those kinds of systems. I’m slowly leaning towards more and more story-driven gameplay, but that doesn’t mean I’m neglecting the fact that I am still making a game. EBZ is wonderful, but we both know it’s not much of a game, and that being true has even made its players (players?!) question what a game truly is.
While you say “actually doing it” as opposed to “the game telling you that you did it,” they’re pretty much the same - except in the case of “actually doing it,” you have to click a few extra links. In Echo Bazaar, you click “investigate the reporter” and then some text comes up to tell you that you followed the guy and overhead a suspicious conversation. It feels kind of hollow, because it’s pre-baked stuff you’ve simply unlocked by pressing the right button, but if you really care about the story then it’s usually ok. I think most people will agree that this isn’t a very good mechanic, but I also think that most people will find something to like in Echo Bazaar, so it succeed fairly often.
When you’re “actually doing something,” it seems like it would be more like this: you click “follow the reporter!” and then “hide around the corner!” and then “eavesdrop on the conversation”? You’d get more or less the same text, but broken up into three parts. It would make the game more interactive, in theory - there would have to be other options along the way, so you have better control of what happens. In this case, success or failure is on your choices as the player, not random chance. But I don’t think it would be inherently better than what Echo Bazaar does. As a player, it’s hardly more interesting and you just have to press extra buttons to get what you need. As the creator, it radically increases the amount of “content” you need to make for all the different options. So it’s a question of execution.
The distinction has merit, though, because the same thing comes up in a lot of dialogue based games - in Mass Effect, or LA Noire, you’re given small snippets or themes of dialogue to choose from. Then the writers put the rest of the words in your character’s mouth. So you’re talking to a suspect in LA Noire, and you pick “doubt” because you have a little feeling of doubt - and suddenly your character is outright accusing the suspect, potentially losing their trust or making them angry. And that sucks, because you, as the player, didn’t mean for your character to do that. The problem here is that your interactive role as the player isn’t perfect - you just give vague directions to the character and the writers fill in the rest.
I haven’t actually played LA Noire myself, but I’ve been reading about it and I’ve listened to a number of podcasts about it. From my understanding, a lot of the “gameplay” is pretty terrible - the driving sucks, the shooting sucks, the interrogation is a bit iffy, and so on. But solving mysteries is really fun and really interesting. Enough to make up for every other fault the game has. Essentially, the game is carried entirely by its atmosphere and story, so even though the mechanics suck it’s completely worth playing.
(As a side note, a lot of people who are really into gaming as a medium have argued against LA Noire being a “good” game, and rightfully so. Its strong points are borrowed from other mediums, and it’s probably the current pinnacle of “interactive movie” games. But that just means we don’t need to make more games like LA Noire. I think it’s a great opportunity to learn about what people enjoy, and what they’re willing to pay for. A game that isn’t about action can actually be successful - that’s a strong message for publishers. And if every game told a story as well as LA Noire…)
So the point of all that is this: if you’re telling a great story, and your players are engaged despite the simple mechanics for delivering it, things will probably work out. Grinding in Echo Bazaar is completely boring for the player because it’s a simple mechanic and nothing beyond that. But being involved in some grand mystery at the Shuttered Palace, or talking to suspects (in the Rubbery Murders content you buy with Fate) is super cool, and unlocking things like Stormy Eyed feels rewarding despite the mechanics. It all works because you’re engaged, and that should be the ultimate goal of every mechanic in a game.
(My points about LA Noire comes from a number of podcasts (Destructoid’s Podtoid, The Escapist Podcast, Japanator’s Japanator AM, The Electric Hydra) but I don’t have the exact episode numbers, and also this article on GameFront)
