The Citizen Kane of video games... - by Yakoob
Zygoptera on 8/10/2009 at 22:25
Quote Posted by Phatose
There's a problem with this line of logic. All of the 'plot points' require player decisions to be invoked, and even then the details of any plot point are determined by the player's actions.
That's rubbish, for three reasons.
First, I could watch CK expecting Star Wars and be deeply disappointed by its lack of stormtroopers, lasers and big bangs. That doesn't suddenly transfrom CK into a bad movie, it would make me an idiot.
Second, and most important, user choice is almost entirely irrelevant to story. If it's in the game, 99% of the time,
it happened in the story, even if it didn't happen in
your story. Sure,
you may not find Xachariah in the mortuary or get the story from Fin Andyle or use all the sensory stones or unlock your own sensory stone or unlock Zerthimon's circle but that does not mean that the things illustrated by them did not happen, they're still there and they still happened even if you didn't experience them- analogously if I choose to go out and make a cup of tea in the middle of Star Wars I can't then argue that Alderaan didn't blow up because I didn't see it, it's still in the story, and if I miss an episode in a TV series I cannot argue the events in that did not happen because I didn't see it.
Thirdly, the base argument is ridiculous, even without the reducto ad absurdum of "I choose to never move in SS2, thus the story consists of well, nothing, not even an email from Polito" or "I never go into the lighthouse in Bioshock, thus the story consists of swimming around forever in a burning sea". If I do a power run of Fallout/ Morrowind/ Fallout 2/ .. and thus finish in under an hour that simply does not suddenly transform them into games with particularly poor plots, and really short to boot.
It's more of a deterministic Schrodinger's Cat type situation- at the beginning the plot exists in its whole, what you see or don't in any given playthrough is determined by choice and chance. Your argument is like arguing that because you can open the box and find some shed fur, maybe a hairball and a small smelly wet patch, but no cat, then the whole cat should never be considered.
Quote Posted by Wormrat
Are you one of those "the mechanics have a message" people? Give me an example of "gameplay" that tells a story. It's called storytelling, after all.
Spirit Meter, Mask of the Betrayer.
Sulphur on 8/10/2009 at 22:32
Quote Posted by Phatose
I'd say the prime difference between a plot and a sequence of events is that the former is presented for the purpose of entertainment. The extension of the term to also encompass gameplay is not all that more major then the extension of it to cover epic poems, musicals, movies and novels.
Interesting idea. But if you extend plot to include gameplay, then depending on how good the person playing the game is, you could have a terrible plot or a riveting one.
The 'entertainment value' and quality of the experience would be largely dependent on the skill of the player. Taking that into account, a game experience as a whole could swing from being as bad as a Uwe Boll movie to being as good as something by Spielberg or Scorsese, just by virtue of player input.
It's pretty much the same concept Ebert was talking about during the whole 'games can't be art' debate.
You've made me wonder though. What about that Koopa example? Can it be as affecting an experience as Citizen Kane?
---
>jump on koopa
You spring into the air and descend, the heels of your boots cleaving the space between you and the green turtle before they connect with its bald head, making an audible *deboopbip*, which causes it to retreat into its shell.
>jump on shell
The shell spins away on impact, knocking every other enemy off on the way, and falls off the edge of the platform.
>jump on next koopa
You spring into the air and miss. You fall over the edge of the platform.
**YOU HAVE DIED***
You blink back into view at the halfway point. Rows of pipes line the way ahead, with strange snapping plants ascending and descending from their entrances at regular intervals.
A koopa is ambling towards you.
---
There's certainly room to make that more involving just by changing the scenario around and not the gameplay.
Instead of Mario, let's say you're a ghost. And instead of koopas, we have terrorists. Terrorists who killed you ten minutes ago. And the game is forcing you to re-enact those last ten minutes before you died. Maybe you'll die again. Maybe you won't, in which case the entire story changes.
Not quite Citizen Kane, but maybe slightly more affecting than trying to find Princess Peach.
That's it, I think. I think what we need our 'Citizen Kane' game to do to show its strength is for it to be able to alter and stretch its narrative to accommodate all player input seamlessly. And that's something that only games can potentially do. Not movies.
Wow. What a strange ramble. It's 4 in the AM now and I think I need to go to sleep. But maybe I got the points you folks were talking about.
Chade on 8/10/2009 at 22:41
Quote Posted by Zygoptera
Thirdly, the base argument is ridiculous, even without the reducto ad absurdum of "I choose to never move in SS2, thus the story consists of well, nothing, not even an email from Polito" or "I never go into the lighthouse in Bioshock, thus the story consists of swimming around forever in a burning sea". If I do a power run of Fallout/ Morrowind/ Fallout 2/ .. and thus finish in under an hour that simply does not suddenly transform them into
games with particularly poor plots, and really short to boot.
If you accept what Phatose is saying, games don't have plots. Games have potential plots.
Zygoptera on 8/10/2009 at 22:53
I think it's fairly obvious I don't agree --at a fundamental level-- with what Phatose is saying, at least insofar as it makes a difference to any analysis of plot quality. That's basically the point to be made with the Schrodinger analogue, just because plot 'disappears' during a playthrough does not mean it should therefore be discounted.
Chade on 8/10/2009 at 22:57
But you can't say that his opinions aren't internally consistent. They're not rubbish. It's just that he's extended the term "plot" in a way that you aren't comfortable with.
Phatose on 8/10/2009 at 23:15
Schrodinger's plot indeed. From such a standpoint, KotOR's plot included both the darkside ending and the lightside ending - they are there, after all, whether you see them or not.
It seems to be pretty self evident that plot has ceased to be singular.
Zygoptera on 9/10/2009 at 01:21
That's irrelevant- having a non-linear plot is simply not relevant to its quality or lack thereof. If I play Revan as lightside it does not mean that the darkside ending does not exist for anything other than that specific playthrough. If you're considering KOTOR's plot then
both lightside and darkside endings are relevant. Else, as per choosing to never move in SS2, the entire concept of plot becomes meaningless.
Quote Posted by Chade
But you can't say that his opinions aren't internally consistent. They're not rubbish. It's just that he's extended the term "plot" in a way that you aren't comfortable with.
Not really- someone who believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible can have internally consistent beliefs, but that doesn't mean that their belief that the Earth is 5000 years old isn't rubbish.
Chade on 9/10/2009 at 01:45
Ok, you've got me there. But there's a bit of a difference between believing the world is 5000 years old and believing that the term plot should become more abstract for use in games.
I don't really care if we talk about "plot" or "message" or whatever. But I do think that traditional concept of story doesn't make any sense when directly applied to games. Or at least: the more abstract your concept of story becomes, the more sense it makes when applied to games.
CCCToad on 9/10/2009 at 02:56
Am I the only one who thinks Citizen kane was just slightly overrated?
I have a feeling I may need that flame resistant vest.
june gloom on 9/10/2009 at 03:39
Which is made out of backing up your statements.
