Home
Why video games are an intrinsically poor narrative medium
As the fiction of the uncanny valley continues to evaporate, graphical fidelity will inevitably become less and less important. Critics have often bandied about the notion that we can bridge the “implausibility gap” in games with better, more dynamic interactive choices. I don't disagree with this assessment. Instead, I offer that lack of choice is a proximate cause of narrative disbelief or disengagement. The medium has more fundamental problems it needs to fix first.
Using a diegetic methodology, Valve explains a how momentum interacts with portals.
Speaking in terms of ultimate causes, I think the video games present a much simpler roadblock to basic storytelling: They automatically destroy your suspension of disbelief through the persistent use of non-diegetic elements. In terms of the history of narrative, I can't think of a medium that is more intrinsically non-diegetic. At every turn, developers bombard us, as participants, with unwanted white noise -- bric-a-brac leftover from an arcade era where everything was about high scores and "winning."
To prove my point, here's a list of present (and past) problems and rituals that have interpolated themselves into the experience of playing a game. All of these issues demand (or demanded) diegetic or technical redress in order to move the medium forward in terms of storytelling: pressing a power button and navigating menus to start play (as opposed to merely opening a book to its first page): failing 72-pin connectors in an NES cartridge; pressing start to pause the action; choosing a difficulty; inputting a double-affirmation of the choice you've decided on; item screens; watching a load screen; pressing a button to advance through static text-based dialogue screens; pressing a button to advance past cutscenes; cutscenes themselves; quick-time events; fail states and their accompanying fail screens; segmented tutorials; staff credits; arbitrary save/password systems; etc.
Basically, all of these elements amount to this: While the game is trying to tell you a story, it's constantly reminding you that it's a game. When you read a book or watch a movie, how often does the author or director remind you that you're reading a book or watching a movie?
Diegesis is an important notion that developers should keep in mind, and I can think of no other mainstream effort that has given more time and consideration to the topic than Dead Space 2. Nearly all of the critical information the developers need the player to see exists within the fiction of the world. The result is that The Sprawl becomes a richly defined and fully realized place.
Diegesis, design, and Dead Space 2: The future of in-game storytelling
Unlike Dead Space 2, the wildly innovative title BioShock constantly
reminds you that you're playing a game.
So what are some simple solutions to the common problems that developers often solve with non-diegetic displays? I don't have all the answers. Obviously, companies like Irrational Games (creators of BioShock) have staffs of people thinking about possible alternatives for eight hours a day, five days a week. But since I'm at risk of sounding like an armchair intellectual, here are three simple suggestions that would remove all of the basic informational overlays in BioShock:
- Health meter: A black ring around the edge of the screen that encroaches on the player's vision as damage accumulates could represent loss of consciousness.
- Eve meter: The player's Plasmid arm could have several branching veins that glow. Every time he uses a Plasmid, one of the branches "empties." The number of glowing veins indicates the number of remaining uses.
- Ammo display: The sound of a discharging gun could increase in pitch as the player nears the end of his clip.
Those suggestions aside, many challenges lie ahead. How do you incorporate a pause screen in a diegetic fashion? What about save screens? Staff credits? Even Dead Space 2 hasn't broached these core conventions of design.
Also, some narrative-focused franchises have a lot more ground to cover than others. Open-world titles like Grand Theft Auto 4 have to contend with mechanics like quest-giving and minimaps. Fallout 3's itemized dialogue options aren't a very elegant solution to the problems of in-game conversation. Final Fantasy.... Well, that franchise is basically just one big menu.
It is quite possible that developers will never find workable solutions for some of these problems. And that's fine. Some genres don't need them. I can't see why Tetris would need to convey your high score within the bounds of a narrative. Either way, video games are a new and unique medium, so the boundaries of what is possible still remain hazy. As long as we keep trying to stretch our minds to think of new ways to deliver story information, we'll get there eventually.
1
2
