GCDC 2007: Bates, Ralston say storytelling mostly “sucks”
The Games Convention Developers Conference (GCDC) was abuzz with the topic of games as an art form, and a panel discussion that QJ blogger Isaac C. reported on yesterday was just one of many angles veering to one aspect of creativity in games: stories. According to storytelling veterans Bob Bates (Sherlock: The Riddle of the Crown Jewels, Infocom) and Ken Rolston (The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Bethesda), the various facets of modern narratives “sucked.” And they came to that conclusion in unison.
Not that it needed to be verified by experts, but it did place the industry and story writers in check. There were many things that seemed to change for games in the newer generation, and even though most games come with every element needed to be well-rounded, they just paled in comparison.
“What passes for story today is just revealed back-story. You can provide context, but it’s fundamentally boring. What’s interesting is showing characters who change over time,” said veteran writer Bob Bates. The interactive fiction designer of alluring Timequest also maintained that creating ambiguity in games, especially on objects and elements that the author wished to present to the player in a certain light, were an absolute no-no.
“The more specific the translation of the author’s ideas to the player’s experience, the better,” he said, adding that games should be driven by definite thematic elements. An immediate result would be that game content should continue to propel the story forward, whether it be a CG animation just barely viewable in the distance or a close up of a half-burnt postcard in a wrecked room.
“Stories should be distributed all across the environment in many different ways and in extremely small chunks,” he explained further, though he disapproved of the use of cutscenes and long blocks of text. On the other hand, Rolston wasn’t fond of how stories were told.
More on the two veterans’ two cents – and one aimed at Mass Effect – at the full article.
The Games Convention Developers Conference (GCDC) was abuzz with the topic of games as an art form, and a panel discussion that QJ blogger Isaac C. reported on yesterday was just one of many angles veering to one aspect of creativity in games: stories. According to storytelling veterans Bob Bates (Sherlock: The Riddle of the Crown Jewels, Infocom) and Ken Rolston (The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Bethesda), the various facets of modern narratives “sucked.” And they came to that conclusion in unison.
Not that it needed to be verified by experts, but it did place the industry and story writers in check. There were many things that seemed to change for games in the newer generation, and even though most games come with every element needed to be well-rounded, they just paled in comparison.
“What passes for story today is just revealed back-story. You can provide context, but it’s fundamentally boring. What’s interesting is showing characters who change over time,” said veteran writer Bob Bates. The interactive fiction designer of alluring Timequest also maintained that creating ambiguity in games, especially on objects and elements that the author wished to present to the player in a certain light, were an absolute no-no.
“The more specific the translation of the author’s ideas to the player’s experience, the better,” he said, adding that games should be driven by definite thematic elements. An immediate result would be that game content should continue to propel the story forward, whether it be a CG animation just barely viewable in the distance or a close up of a half-burnt postcard in a wrecked room.
“Stories should be distributed all across the environment in many different ways and in extremely small chunks,” he explained further, though he disapproved of the use of cutscenes and long blocks of text. On the other hand, Rolston wasn’t fond of how stories were told.
“Hierarchical dialogue trees really suck,” he said. He wasn’t even moved with BioWare’s dialogue mechanics in Mass Effect, saying that the ability to interrupt conversations for the sake of alternative dialogue was a “joy buzzer”. And the tendency of some games to use cinematic techniques to tell stories weren’t on top of his list – even if a select few pulled off such feats well.
But then stories in games are still subject to “adoration by preference”, meaning that gamers would like a story simply because it suits their tastes. It’s even apparent in the discussion: Bates would rather have a tied down, focused story, while Rolston would like ambiguity, leaving a sense of dynamic interactivity and freedom in a game.