There is a persistent discussion in the games space about the viability of linear narrative games as appropriate vehicles of storytelling. It’s hard to argue the relevance of video games that guide players down a predetermined route with little room for choice and authorship, when games like Mass Effect and Alpha Protocol provide narrative player-created experiences. In fact, the unique selling point of games as a medium is their interactivity, and by extension, a greater opportunity for meaningful choice on the part of the player can only be a good thing, right?
Do not be so sure. The beauty of a really good story is that it stimulates different people in different ways, and this is true of all media, not just video games; It is not impossible to immerse yourself in a fictional world even when you do not have control over it. . Just because video games can allow for a branching narrative driven by player actions doesn’t necessarily mean they should. At least not all the time.
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (2008) is a perfect example of how a linear narrative can really benefit a game, and playing it recently opened my eyes to how powerful and exciting a well-crafted and focused story can be; even when towed, it turns and spins as a passenger, rather than a driver.
U2 is a masterclass on how to create a game that works (and could only work) as a linear experience. It nails all the elements that drive that experience, and it does so with a flair and flair that elevates it above almost all of its rivals. Using this game as a starting point, let’s take a look at some of those elements, how they present themselves in various cases, and why they are so successful.
For starters, the most fundamental aspect of a good story is the power to stay emotionally engaged. When a game is stripped of characterization and structure based on the choice and preference of the player, they are left with only the tools that we see in other media, such as cinema or literature. It should satisfy our need for conflict, drama, and development with just the assets it presents to us. When we lack the benefit of authorship, we need real substance in what is given to us.
Let’s break this down into a couple of broader categories:
History
When a narrative only proceeds down a single, predetermined path, it must be compelling enough to encourage progression. When we don’t care what is happening, we have no desire to move forward, and as a result the scenarios become formulated and out of date.
While it is true that linearity gives the creator a much greater level of control over what players see and how they act, it is equally true that such a structure is easy to lose interest and walk away from if it is not designed correctly. Obviously, being well-written and well-acted helps, but it’s just as important (if not more) that the pacing is right.
When Jason Killingsworth recently wrote about Dead Space 2, he mentioned the use of dynamic contrast and how it provided a wonderful counter to the intensity of the combat. He makes an excellent point, and the use of such a technique is also a vital component in maintaining our focus. DS2 itself, being a linear game, is a great example of good pacing. The action of balls against the wall is one thing, but it is during moments of quiet and silent contemplation that we most connect with our avatar. Chaos is not an environment conducive to characterization or narrative development, so connecting segments are left quieter to fill in these gaps.
There is a common misconception about video games that constant action is the best way to keep people entertained. For those with a short attention span or those just looking for the catharsis that comes with exploding legions of evil minions, this may well be true. But for those of us who want a deeper and more satisfying experience, it’s imperative that Hollywood blockbuster-style action sequences are juxtaposed with slower, less intense moments.
Consider Call of Duty: Black Ops, the most successful game in terms of sales and revenue. While it remains an undoubtedly exciting multiplayer experience, their campaign offers nothing that is truly compelling. It revels in shocking violence and constant bombs, bullets, death and destruction, without allowing the player a chance to recover and take a breath. The original Modern Warfare, on the other hand, featured various missions based on stealth and evasion, and as a result provided a much more engaging player component.
So pacing, as well as core factors like writing and acting, are equally important in providing a good story. However, none of these things exist in a vacuum. Drama and conflict do not come from a single narrative premise. They come from …
Characters
If you are going to give up multiple stories, you need to provide us with characters that are strong enough to justify that decision. Again, writing and acting play a critical role, but there must also be developmental arcs. We need to see our characters grow and show real human emotions, no matter if they have flaws; in fact, it is vital that they are. If Nathan Drake didn’t care about his teammates enough to risk his own life for them, he wouldn’t be such an interesting character. How he jeopardizes his relationship with Chloe to ensure Elena’s safety is a particularly telling example of his humanity.
One of my favorite examples of really strong characterization is in Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. When we meet the Prince for the first time, he is an insecure daddy whose actions act as a catalyst for the entire trilogy and stem from seeking his father’s approval. His flaws as a human really define him as a character, and by the end of the game he’s a completely different person than the self-assured, cocky stupidity he started out with. There is a scene midway where he realizes that Farah may have emotional feelings for him, and decides that the best course of action would be to marry her by force, displaying a sense of absolute entitlement that he simply does not possess for the conclusion of the story.
When characters have a complex backstory and related motivations, they are interesting to follow by default. Being able to make it good or bad doesn’t matter.
The story is important, but why follow it when you have no one to worry about?
However, linear video games cannot be successful with their non-interactive elements alone. The player’s role in the development of the story is what brings all the components together, and how they progress affects their perceptions of the whole package.
Bioshock is perhaps the most poignant example of how excellent design (audio, visual, and mechanical) can elevate a good story to levels of immersion and depth that other media cannot emulate. Your path through the crisp, dripping underwater world of Rapture was the same as mine. It doesn’t matter if you rescued or collected the Little Sisters. His assignment of ADAM and the plasmids he invested in is arbitrary. We explore the same places with the same character, and in the end we are stunned by the same revelation. The brilliance of the game is that while we were given the freedom to explore and fight however we wanted, to perceive this wonderful world in different ways, the story that brought it all together was exactly the same for you as it was for me, and everyone else who did. they played. Narrative linearity doesn’t have to extend to the game.
As players, we have no objection to exploring a world that we cannot significantly influence. We don’t mind being led down a specific path to a specific scene. It’s fine. We know what is happening. However, the more it pushes us forward, points our way, and propels us from behind the scenes, the less investment we have. Let’s walk and explore. If there is only one way to go, we will find it. If a tank destroys us, don’t tell us where the rocket launcher is. We will find. Most importantly, don’t hit us over the head with meaning, context, and drama. If you’ve done your job well enough, we’ll find all of those things too.
There is still a place in this industry for linear games. Moral choices and branching narratives aren’t the only ways to tell a good story. I, for one, really believe that. You do?
