11.28.09
Story Video Game
There are some video games out there that are trying to push the envelope with regards to using the medium as a storytelling device. Fahrenheit (aka Indigo Prophecy) is probably my favorite one of those, and the same developer is currently working on Heavy Rain, which looks very promising. But I think we could do much better than that. If I had millions of dollars in development money, I’d create the following.
Imagine starting up the game for the first time. You begin a New Story. You select two to four genre modules. These are things like horror, noir, sci-fi, crime, drama, and so on. The genres are assigned each to one of the four face buttons of your controller (say, Triangle on your PS4 controller is now assigned the Horror genre). The game opens with your character in his or her apartment. You can create your character’s appearance or have it be randomly generated.
Now, your character has no predetermined abilities; these will only come up in play. If you go straight to the gym, your character will be athletic. If the first thing you do is sit down on the computer, you’ll have some electronics abilities. And so on. But what matters more is that you don’t have a predetermined story yet. You only have your apartment, and other locations (with other characters) are created procedurally only when you visit them.
Here’s the key component of this game: when you want to interact with someone or something, you face it and press one of your face buttons. The button assignments then pick a random result from the genre assigned to them.
What does this mean? It means that if you open a closet with the Horror button, you may find a corpse inside, or a door to a darker dimension. If you pick the action button instead, the closet doors could open to reveal an assortment of weapons. The Noir button is definitely going to give you some voice over, whatever you find. A single push of the button could lead to a no-event or a minor event. A quick double click of the button triggers an important event.
The core system of the game tracks your choices and maps them to certain story structures. If you find a corpse, you can now ask other characters about the deceased or find info on the computer. If you get attacked, you can now find information on the attackers. If you talk to someone, their importance in the game rises, and they are more probably to be introduced by the system in later scenes.
Now, you may wonder how this leads to a story. The trick in the procedures and algorithms is to have certain core things that snap in place and tie things together. If you find several corpses, then at some point the system is going to make a character you’ve encountered the murderer and trigger a final confrontation scene, which includes a flashback showing that character killing the victims. If you’ve found a secret conspiracy, at some point people will come after you, and the system will make a character ultimately responsible and allow you to figure out through research, conversation, or other methods who it is. I’m actually thinking that a few modules would exist that have pretty specific outlines, and that the roles in those outlines are filled by the characters you encounter. Future updates to the game add more events and more story modules, for a greater variety of possible stories.
Sure, the resulting story might not always make perfect sense; it will require a certain amount of interpretation on behalf of the player to work through it. But it won’t be worse than any given Metal Gear Solid plot!
What fascinates me about this idea is the pure sandbox aspect combined with a story structure engine. You can make your own Horror Noir story. You can pace it the way you want to. You can decide that right now is the time to be attacked or to find that special clue, while right after your character takes a breather and has an introspective scene.
Is it possible? Maybe. But sadly, I doubt anyone would ever risk much money on such a far-out idea.
Could I or someone else design something like this as a face-to-face RPG, maybe a collaborative GM-less game with the mechanics taking over the procedural parts? Now that’s a far more interesting (and unanswered) question… 
Tim Jensen said,
November 29, 2009 at 8:12 am
It’s completely possible. All that is required is someone having the will and taking the time to do it.
I, for one, would play.
Joel said,
December 5, 2009 at 2:42 pm
That’s an awesome concept, Christian. I’d play it for sure. It works the same way the most nimble and elegant tabletop Story-games do: by providing a platform for infinite but MEANINGFUL variation. Very nice. It certainly is a daunting prospect to program, but not necessarily impossible (I say as a layman), and worth the effort I think.
I’ve been thinking for awhile about another implementation of Storygame science for computer games (within the more planned-story model), based on the principle of making failure interesting and fun: THERE IS NO GAME OVER RESULT. I mean, the game will have an end, but there is no “Sorry, you failed, try again from last save” result for any action. Instead, failing at a task means the story changes, and goes on. Yo needn’t chart a different result for every missed shot, failed jump or bungled conversation–though charting interactions more minutely with, say, relationship attitude adjustment points is WAY cool–but when a major undertaking is failed, then it is FAILED, and the character and player both have to deal with that and move on. And if the failure is lethal, then, get this–THAT CHARACTER DIES AND YOU CONTINUE WITH A NEW CHARACTER.
You can have a whole stable of main characters which can slide into protagonist position if the first one gets killed or otherwise ruined. You can let the Game OVER happen if the last one dues, I suppose, but even then there’s no need: just set up just enough “kill” points on the plot to potentially use all the stable. BAM.
I so want to play that game.
Peace,
-Joel
PS. I guess you’re talking about a more “universal RPG” approach, where I’m talking more about a “focused-premise game” type thing. Like FATE or Solar System vs. Dogs in the Vineyard or Grey Ranks. Both are cool to have in the tabletop roleplay world, and the same would be true for video games.
Christian said,
December 5, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Hey Joel,
You should check out Heavy Rain, if you haven’t yet. It’s due out on the PS3 next year. You have multiple POV characters (like in Fahrenheit/Indigo Prophecy), and if one of them dies, that’s just part of the story while the others continue.
I generally like the “no game over” way of playing. I hate having to repeat things. Old adventure games, like Secret of Monkey Island, were usually very good about this.
Joel said,
December 7, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Oh yeah, I forgot about that one! I thought it was funny as, earlier this year, I was explaining my idea to a guy who works in video game design, and he was explaining all the reasons it would just NEVER FLY (his big one: “All the completists would get mad that they have to go through the game over and over again for all the possibilities!”). . .and the next day I found a promo spot for Heavy Rain.
I would LOVE to try it. Have a spare PS3 lying around?
Christian said,
December 7, 2009 at 7:44 pm
You’ll just have to come over and play at my house
Joel said,
December 9, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Hey, there you go.
Free, Affirmed, Expressive, Consequential « Story by the Throat! said,
December 16, 2009 at 5:33 pm
[...] friend Christian of Berengad Games also recently explored ways of achieving dynamic and interactive story in video games. He had a specific theoretical [...]
Julian Michels said,
December 17, 2009 at 10:32 pm
Chrstian, this is really good stuff. I want to play.