Exposition and Micro-Narrative

EXPOSITION AND MICRO-NURRRATIVE
By

Steve Bullin

As mentioned in Games Need Better Storytelling part 2, exposition is the integral part of storytelling that delivers the context needed for meaningful world interactions to the player and.. well dang-it here; Extra Credits did a bit on Exposition already. And I guess this should be here too. Anywho, without exposition done well the player will either tune out of the games story and not know what's happening or are less likely to care about what does happen. I bet there are people out there now saying "We'll I don't really care about story, I just like multiplayer and shooting things.", I'm tempted to tell you to leave right now.. But I know that's just because you've become accustom to terrible stories in games. Everyone has those moments they've just started playing a game and they just can't get themselves to care enough to keep playing. They toss the controller aside and turn of their console(or computer) and say "This is so stupid. Why does the game even have me doing this?". And HAHA, you've just proven my point. Narrative is the justification of actions, without it, we don't feel or understand the drive for anything to happen onscreen. It's like reading a very, very terrible fan fiction or .. story written by an inexperienced author. Things like explosions, and gun scenes, and the hero making out with the girl are there just because. And because the creator simply wanted it -without any internal logic or reasoning behind the events happening- the reader really can't get themselves to enjoy, much less understand, the piece. 

 

Of course there are games like chess or checkers that some might argue have no narrative, to that I say hogwash. Narrative does not always have to embody the form we regularly associate with "story", it simply has to establish a purpose. You draw O's to make a line or cut off the other player's line of X's and win. You move the pieces on checkers to hop over and eliminate all the opponent's pieces. You move the specific chess pieces in certain ways because they each have different titles and properties, you do this to corner the opponent's king. The frog crosses the road and river to get to the other side. You shoot down the missiles because they're nukes and will blow up whole towns and you'll lose. Now the exposition in these simple cases like chess or checkers would simply be the rules. To win you have to corner the king, to corner the king you have to set up a number of your pieces that will entrap him without being at risk of being removed in the following turn themselves. To do that you have to understand the movement of each piece. And there on would be a description of the movements and rules each separate piece abides by throughout the game. 

The same is true (and better explained) with the narrative of Frogger, getting across the road requires you don't die. Dieing is the narrative behind an event that causes and end game, where crossing the road or river is the narrative behind the player moving up the screen. Surviving and getting across without causing an end game is the narrative behind winning the level. Ergo the exposition behind all of these things is the game's explanation of how the narrative fits behind the mechanic and progression of play. When the player causes this end game it was because they were hit by a car, they drowned, ect. The exposition is accomplished in these early forms by graphics and sound effects, and nothing has changed. The narrative behind why something could be in these life/death situation is a frog on the highway near a river. The narrative behind the mechanic of movement is jumping, the exposition of this is the sound effect and the animation of the pixel frog jumping. Likewise the exposition of the frog entering an end game is the death animation and sound following an event that would cause an end state. The exposition delivers the context needed for meaningful world interactions to the player. Avoiding or chasing the pixels on screen mean something and provide the drive for the game, the exposition explains the narrative and creates the framework for the experience.  

(this guy does a bunch of great game recordings check his channel out here)

I'm certain all of us have had moments where, without that framework, we were unable to appreciate an experience. When we were real young and we couldn't figure out the controls we still loved the movement onscreen, but got upset with the game when it didn't do what we wanted. And remember that moment you first picked up a game and really got the controls? It was as if a whole world was opened up to us onscreen. Because of the impute-response and the exposition-narrative on top of it we acquired an understanding to that impute-response happening onscreen and were really able to immerse ourselves into the world. We could feel this sort of kinetic projection between ourselves and the avatar onscreen. We think jump or shoot in our heads and it translates to actions onscreen, our avatar gets hit off a cliff or we misjudge a jump and cringe when we see them fall to their death. We could project ourselves as the character onscreen. This kind of self projection onto the game avatar makes every in-game interaction more intimate and engaging for the player. Here is where dialog comes in. 

How fun is it watching people lean when making a turn?

In truth dialog is simply and extension of the exact same exposition to narrative as mentioned before, it is simply a different form. Similar to how death sound is similar exposition to death animation, it simply engages the player differently in providing that context. End game death text -along with opening menu and file loading- might be one of the most perfected handling of dialog exposition in game simply because it provides pacing and doesn't interrupt the standard gameflow within the piece. It forces that moment of pause and makes the player wallow in their moment of failure, while also giving them time to calm down, or deescalate from the tension of the situation they were in at the moment of the end game. It's like catching your breath before running into battle, it allows a moment of mental preparation and allows the player to feel their triumphs are more meaningful because they were allowed a moment to pause and reassess the challenge before them. Giving that time for players to analyze the game's challenge and strategist attaches that much more meaning to gameplay and different mechanics as they are introduced over time. 

You know when-

-Alright, alright. Dialog exposition. 

The movement in gaming for the past... probably longer then I've been around. Has been to better convey story, character, plot, narrative, within games and to make those characters and story more real and meaningful to the player. I'll take a shot in the dark and say that's actually been the underlying movement throughout entire history of games. But to speak specifically about video games, the movement has been to expand the narrative and world of games through interaction and plot LIKE NO PLAYER HAS EVER SEEN! We see this through the obsession of dynamic choice, more realistic graphic, more realistic physics, character design, character and world interaction, ect. But the simple fact of the matter is that all these things boil down to a flashy exposition of a, normally less then flashy or interesting, narrative. This is where exposition and narrative in games fail, they provide context for a shallow, dull, or downright overplayed narrative. If that narrative is not something players can really relate or get attached to then the motivation built behind everything in the piece is lost to them. All the novels worth of text, dialog interactions, or whatever interactions onscreen that give us context cannot make us interested in a flat world. Now there are a dozen things that can debunk a narrative and ruin a game, but a good example might be those really poorly made web based games. I'm more talking about the, shoot the watermelon or stomp the cockroach, kind of games then FarmVille. The narrative in those games is weak; not just because they're punch, shoot, crush the thing games. But because that's the entire narrative, do this action, "Win a Prize!"; but we know that's a scam so the only narrative is the action itself. The exposition of some watermelon exploding or some cardboard cutout figure getting hit is the reasoning behind the interaction, flashy exposition with an uninteresting narrative. 

Narrative and exposition are two sides of the same coin, the story and the means of storytelling. As we've seen one does not exist without the other even in games without dialog or much in the way of narrative. The best way to learn balance in my opinion is to study experiences that use the least number of forms of exposition as possible to better acknowledge and understand both the underlying narrative and the exact lengths the forms of exposition go to convey the moments of narrative in a game. In other words we should be look at games that have no dialog (or very little) to better understand the importance of it and the importance of just leaving it out when it's unnecessary. By understanding the depth and level of story and characters that can be conveyed through exposition that's easy to include without the slightest break in the gameflow we can more easily study and come to understand the impact of exposition and narrative on a piece. We can learn from games like Journey, the classics from the arcade era, from studying the silent protagonists within Portal, Half Life, Zelda, and mountains of others that I can't think of right now because it's really late. But we'll talk more about those fun specifics in length later.^^

For now, good night everyone, and thanks for tuning in.

 

Game Design Needs Better Storytelling Pt1[E]

Author's note - So while writing a small essay for school I got on the topic of storytelling and while not wanting to vary too far from that paper's thesis I'd like to say more on the topic, so that is what this is going to be. We're going to discuss storytelling in games, popular narration mechanics in other creative media and how they can be adapted to an interactive media. Understanding these will give us a better perspective on how story can be delivered within video games. Now not long ago Bob Chipman -no this blog will not be entirely responses or offshoots of what one internet personality says, Bob just brings up good topics, get off my back- Mr. Chipman as the Game Overthinker put out an episode on the rather popular topic of developing video games into competent film. And because the video was pretty good and I'll be bringing up some of what is mentioned later in this discussion, here, give his blog a quick look and watch it.

MECHANICS

 In the Game Overthinker's video he addresses how for the most part games historically have been lackluster in the storytelling department, and he's unarguably right. Of course there have been a number of shinning gems throughout the years, and even within the media's oldest routes we've found ways through gameplay to translate real and powerful experiences, as an example I'm going to site the 1980's Atari arcade Missile Command. And if you'd like an explanation take a few minutes and hear Extra Creditz's argument on the topic of Narrative Mechanics. Of course this is may kind of small stuff to some of you guys, "Games can tell a story about an experience by having you act out that experience?"

But of course there's more to it than just that, if it was just that the addition of film level graphics and cinematography along with some amazingly detailed mechanics using dialog (morality/story altering) would have catapulted the video game medium into its own Oscar worthy level of appreciation. And we all know it's not achieved that yet, because every year games come out and the major criticism -second to technical flaws- are a poorly designed and executed plot or character experience within the game. The story is boring, the characters are one dimensional, gameplay does not reflect the story or character's experience, the only connection to an excuse of a story are poorly made cutscenes... We've basically heard them all, and the problem is we keep hearing them. Remember Dead Island and that tear jerker tease trailer they had, along with those terrible characters and plot they delivered? Actually the game was just pretty awful in general, I felt no shame in trading that back in for store credit at Gamestop, wish I had bought it pre-owned in the first place if at all actually. So something is broken and it should be fixed, as much as some people might believe it's doing away with cutscenes it's not. Look at Bioshock. That game is held up as a shinning example of how to ingrain story and plot into gameplay, and it does it through cutscenes.  

Video games are a medium all to themselves, the take lessons and borrow theory from others like literature and film, but are governed by completely different rules. most important, and noticeable, is that the player has direct influence on the speed of the games/story progression through gameplay. The bulk of their experience is delivered from what their avatar is able to or, in some cases more significantly, not able to do. The gameplay has to reflect the story because that is the part of the characters experience you, as the player, are directly a part of. And because gameplay is what players are truly involved and interested in game designers have gone with themes and a hand full of story forms that can be reflected through gameplay right off the bat. 

TANGENT DIVERSION: PULP FICTION

These kind of story forms that just jump right into the action are reminiscent of the pulp fiction of the 1890 - 1950's. "Pulp" referring to the cheap composite wood pulp paper that the magazines were printed on. These magazines were so cheap to produce and had so many different kinds of action packed high fantasy short stories they became thee cheap american entertainment and escapism (besides sports) during the depression era. This basically were (along with comics) the origin of geek culture as we know it, possibly even the origin of the 'Jock vs Geek' click divide that persisted so long throughout our popular culture. Within this largely experimental and new kind of literature some of the greatest writers of that generation were found, names that have spawned works that, through varying forms of media; have lasted generations, become literary classics, and even inspired classics outside of their own medium. Pulp's high fantasy, imaginative visual style was also a clear direct inspiration for early game design, spanning from the arcades and early consoles when pixels were still discovering aesthetic tricks to... well now.

BACK ON TOPIC: MAKING SHAPELY FICTION

I digress, game designers use a many of the same narrative mechanics used in pulp fiction to get the characters into the action as soon as possible to get the player into the game. I'm going to comment on concepts and material for these mechanics from a great book on creative writing by Jerome Stern titled Making Shapely Fiction. 

(content examples)

     This is literally one of the best practical resources for sharpening storytelling technique and execution I have seen to date.  Now all these concepts are within Mr. Stern's book, and I'm just going to summarize a few of the shapes so if his work interests you then seriously, look into it. This book is more then worth getting your hands on if you're getting into a storytelling medium. 

BEAR AT THE DOOR

All stories, despite length or content, can be broken down to simple narrative concepts. The distinct way that the creator decided to present their material and the implications on the story that result from that. For an example the first kind of story we are going to talk about is the Bear at the Door, this type is when the character and reader are instantly thrown into the action. Something is wrong and the a pressing issue demands the character's attention right away and in most cases is completely unavoidable. It can be anything from depression, or standing in the trenches with your rifle waiting to hear the whistle and climb over into no-mans land. Notice these kinds of situations demand immediate choices from the characters; the kind of split minute decisions that show the character's true believes and motives, how they react under pressure, the kind of things that are really under the hood.  The way the character handles the struggle dictates our immediate impression of the character. The same goes for video games; when after an opening firefight there's a cut-scene and we watch the protagonist goes to kill an enemy, but we see him stop and hold back, we know that even in the face of danger the character holds onto his values. 

The true meat of this story shape is the inner conflicts that arise in the face of the bear, it's the smaller more human problems that let us relate to the character. He can't bring himself  to become an executioner because despite all his training and the battle going on around him he's still the young man that grew up in that quiet suburban home. Our solider might have gotten into fights at school, but that wasn't anything close to this. Even though his family has always held up their nation's military and the concept of duty with such a high respect life was something completely different then duty or honor, it was sacred. Sacred in the way that never needed to be explained, and yet here he is. Fighting ultimately because more powerful uniforms have told him to, killing people considered enemies because they ultimately felt they needed to stop these soldiers. He realizes he doesn't really want to kill these people, but still has driven to because of his basic self preservation; they seem unyielding in their aggression and he doesn't even know who they are. So there is a pause when he raises his gun. Does he pull the trigger?     

The Bear at the Door is even more so true within gameplay and controls. Let's backtrack a bit, Atari's Missile Command -which is probably the best example of a Bear at the Door shape narration in game- from the start of the game you're thrown into the place of the only one able to defend the surrounding towns from the nuclear onslaught. Your decisions must be done in real time and instantly affect gameplay, every move you make effect the outcome of your small digital world. You are instantly interwoven into the full experience, your actions are the story. You feel the responsibility and guilt in the decisions and those emotions become yours.

Next time, Blue Moon and the Journey shape in games and what we could do to do them better.

Read onto Part 2