Article - bjlhct2 On Scenario Design pt 1: Linearity
Pages
| Author | Topic: Article - bjlhct2 On Scenario Design pt 1: Linearity |
|---|---|
|
Triad Mage
Member # 7
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 14:30
Profile
Homepage
SkeleTony, I don't know of any scenario that I would call linear that fits your description of a linear scenario besides movie scenarios. I would call linear scenarios ones like Revenge, Emulations, An Apology, etc. There are many things that the player does, but there is a set plot and order and you cannot deviate from it. You still have to solve problems and fight baddies. Part of why I like them so much is that they move by quickly - each of my actions leads directly towards the next part of the scenario. It makes me feel involved, like things are happening to me. As opposed to a more open-ended scenario, with no real sense of urgency, and I often think 'so what?'. -------------------- "At times discretion should be thrown aside, and with the foolish we should play the fool." - Menander ==== Drakefyre's Demesne - Happy Happy Joy Joy Encyclopedia Ermariana - Trapped in the Closet ==== You can take my Mac when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the mouse! Posts: 9436 | Registered: Wednesday, September 19 2001 07:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 14:33
Profile
Homepage
Dahak: I think the term "linearity" means slightly different things to different people, and that's a large part of why people aren't agreeing. I see "linearity" as referring to a lack of options on the player's part - you can only go in a straight line and not branch off in any direction you choose. If I've read it right, some people don't like it because they don't feel they are involved in the story if they aren't changing things. I like it, because I think it is a very powerful dramatic tool. Edit: Yep, what Drakey said. [ Tuesday, March 01, 2005 14:38: Message edited by: Ash Lael ] -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 5520
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 17:02
Profile
If only we could agree upon the meaning of 'linearity' wouldn't it be interesting to start a poll? Not to choke the discussion but to see the preference of general players ?? Posts: 53 | Registered: Saturday, February 19 2005 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 4445
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 18:10
Profile
Debates on what an "RPG" should or should not resemble aside, the sense of urgency that Canopy was able to create, along with the limitations that TM put on me as a player, made me feel much more a part of that world than the myriad choices with which I was presented in geneforge. Reality is linear, and I think that even hardcore anti-linearists would like their scenario experience to be essentially linear, they just want to trace that line themselves, and not have it traced for them by the designer. However, the more freedom that the designer gives the player, the more disjointed and generic the events of the scenario are going to become, because instead of constructing a single chain of causality, and constructing it well, he must always make sure that he is not restricting the player. As to the comparison between games, books, and movies, what is any kind of media but a substitute for experience? Personally, I can't understand this intense aversion to blurring the line between what are essentially several sides of the same piece of currency; all art can be boiled down to vicarious experience (and yes, I count trying to visualize or auralize pure abstractions as a vicarious experience, albeit of a very trippy nature), and I don't know about you, but I prefer my vicarious experiences well-defined, and if that means removing the illusion of choice from them, then so be it. After all, how much difference is there really between figuring out that tough combat or puzzle, finally understanding that brilliant author's syntax, and picking up that complex film's finer nuances? I think that all of us, playing an RPG like this, are after an imaginary world in which we can immerse ourselves. However, I think that some of us crave the immediacy of an actual narrative, one in which the characters we control have motivations and identities, whether agreeing with ours or no. Others of us want to feel as few restrictions as possible, and, to me, insisting on this seems like it would be sacrificing my own enjoyment to anal-retentiveness, but then, they probably feel the same way about my point of view, so, let's just chalk it up to de gustibus non disputandum est Oh, and SkeleTONY, "screamingly loudly" is a fairly good way to describe unrelenting avalanches of condescending verbiage, especially when the arguments contained therein are really neither eloquent nor coherent enough to justify the condescension. Posts: 293 | Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 3610
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 18:37
Profile
PoD, I agree with you as far as the scenarios we've seen. And a non-linear plot, if not executed very well is exactly what you describe: a disjointed melange of random events. However, if you work from the premise that IC actions hace IC consequences, then you can have non-linearity while still having a cohesive story. Do you have to help save the land you live in from the opressive armies invading it? No. Of course, when you find yourself behind enemy lines, don't complain, because it's all your own damn fault. Now, is that hugely different, and probably much more difficult, then had you been fighting for your homeland all along? Sure. But it's your fault. Posts: 129 | Registered: Tuesday, October 28 2003 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 4445
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 19:10
Profile
I agree with you, Dastal, I just think that it is pretty much impossible, especially for one person working on his or her own time, to come up with the kind of drama that you see in a Canopy and, to a lesser extent, a Bahssikava or a Perfect Forest, without restricting the player to a chain of causality. The chain can branch, but you just aren't going to see huge, dynamic worlds made for BoA. For one thing, it is hard to make four (+/- a few) people affect a dynamic world all that much. If the designer just gives the party a realistic simulation, with consequences for all the party's actions, and lets them run amok as they wish, it is hard to make their actions anything but drops in the bucket. Linearity, on the other hand, equips the designer much better to explain how the party has an effect on anything. I think that for a scenario to be truly non-linear and realistic, it would have to reflect how hard it is for a small group of people to have any effect at all on anything, how hard greatness really is to achieve. Otherwise, you get geneforge, where your smallest actions all aggregate to determine the fate of the world, which, frankly, gives me a headache. Responsibility is one thing that assaults me every day in real life, and I don't need to experience it vicariously. So, yeah. I prefer to be thrust into my destiny. That said, I'm not knocking your tons-of-choices scenarios, I'm just saying that they're far from my cup of tea, and also that, perhaps, the greatly increased difficulty of making them would both detract from the things I care more about in scenarios, and just not be, in general, worth the effort. [ Tuesday, March 01, 2005 19:13: Message edited by: PoD person ] Posts: 293 | Registered: Saturday, May 29 2004 07:00 |
|
Apprentice
Member # 5048
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 22:05
Profile
Combat is a puzzle to the extent that the actions of opponents are, from the player's perspective, deterministic/predictable/consistent. I see that everyone here is agreeing with me that linearity is bad but some is accepted to improve story, even if they don't realize it. :P Posts: 33 | Registered: Sunday, October 3 2004 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 22:11
Profile
Homepage
quote:That's like saying surgery is bad but some is accepted to treat diseases. It can only be taken seriously given a pretty anal-retentive definition of "bad". Anyway, there's still the fact that an excess of choices can confuse and annoy the player even more than a lack of choices can. -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 156
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 23:13
Profile
PODperson: I was with you to some extent until you had to muck up everything you wrote with this bit of nonsense: quote:If you find some argument I made to be lacking(quite possible) then try addressing that. Post the quote where I have been "condescending" or incoherent and explain your contentions. If what you say then is true, then I will be the first person to aknowledge it. But what you did was to toss out a bald assertion and ad hominem and nothing more. Poor form. We have a different preferences & perspectives. No one is objectively "right" here but I at least supported my contentions with argument rather than characterise POD or anyone else as a loud screamer. If verbiage indicates "screaming" then you are guilty of what you accuse me of. The irony is palpable. "Screaming" in an internet post is characterised by all-caps posts, exclamation points adn emboldened words(and usually insults). -------------------- "I am in a very peculiar business. I travel all over the world telling people what they should already know." - James Randi Posts: 219 | Registered: Saturday, October 13 2001 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Tuesday, March 1 2005 23:25
Profile
Homepage
I think we've reached the point of idiocy and flaming. Death to this thread? -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 5415
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 00:32
Profile
The only way I would agree with PoD's sentence: "However, the more freedom that the designer gives the player, the more disjointed and generic the events of the scenario are going to become" is if the word "bad" is placed before "designer". Good designers can have drama and avoid linearity. In fact, I would say that linearity is less dramatic than non-linearity just in general. The more obvious the linearity is, the more obvious that it's just a game, which spoils any drama that's trying to be set up. Drama comes from believeable characters and believable choices. Watching little text bubbles pop out of your characters mouth saying things they wouldn't see is not dramatic, it's pantomime. Running a scenario where there is one goal and all the steps to get to that goal fall down in line one after another so that you just do in order the things you know the creator wants you to do is not dramatic, it's going through the motions. Posts: 62 | Registered: Thursday, January 20 2005 08:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 00:59
Profile
Homepage
I think you're making the exact same mistake you're accusing POD of. In the hands of a good designer, you aren't going through the motions, you're doing things in just this way because the situation is so desperate that it's your only option. That's not undramatic by any means. With open-endedness, the player decides who he fights and when. He gets himself into the fight when he feels like it, and can get himself out whenever he likes. If you always have control, you're never in real danger. If you're never in real danger, where's the excitement? Having other characters (i.e. the bad guys) reducing the player's options is a tremendous dramatic device. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Triad Mage
Member # 7
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 01:48
Profile
Homepage
I agree with the Creator (Ash Lael). There are some scenarios where you still have choices and the scenario progresses in a linear manner - Of Good And Evil is a good example, and so is Quintessence (sort of). Re: the whole movie thing. In a book/movie, I see the characters solve the puzzles and fight the baddies. In a scenario I can do it. DreamGuy, a lot of your ire seems directed at cut scenes where your characters say things that you wouldn't have them say. I can understand that, but expanding that to linear scenarios is a huge generalization. Also, please note that I have not played any BoA scenarios beyond the first four and RoR. -------------------- "At times discretion should be thrown aside, and with the foolish we should play the fool." - Menander ==== Drakefyre's Demesne - Happy Happy Joy Joy Encyclopedia Ermariana - Trapped in the Closet ==== You can take my Mac when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the mouse! Posts: 9436 | Registered: Wednesday, September 19 2001 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 06:19
Profile
Homepage
The best kind of linear scenarios accomplishes what the first half of Emulations does: the designer didn't even have to tell me what I was supposed to be doing, because I wanted to do it anyway. Stareye didn't have to tell me to go on a killing spree, because the setup had me primed and ready to do it anyway. Giving me alternatives just would've weakened the speed of that part. The scenarios that handle linearity adequately (and I'd put Bahs in this category) don't give the player choices because there really aren't choices to be made by the very facts of the situation. The walls are in certain places, and Legare has set a couple of guards -- you're being controlled by the dungeons and the characters, not so much by the designer directly. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 5415
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 07:12
Profile
Saying that linear scenarios aren't bad because your characters would naturally choose to do what the designer expects you to do is making some horribly bad assumptions. Not everyone thinks the same way. What the designer thinks is logical often is not to the rest of the world (and TM's philosophy is a good example there). While I dislike cut scenes, I loathe linear game design. It's not that my hatred of cut scenes is making me hate linear games unfairly. Cut scenes end eventually (and,an in some cases, excrutiatingly long time after they should) and go back to the game. If the scenario itself is linear, the only way to win is not to play. And the arguing that the plot is linear because there is only one logical way to do things is a really circular argument. You're putting the scenario together, so it's not like you couldn't come up with other ways of doing things. Posts: 62 | Registered: Thursday, January 20 2005 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 156
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 09:51
Profile
Drake': I will concede that episodes within a scenario being "linear" is not necessarily a bad thing. A dungeon that must be traversed in which there is only one entrance and one exit, for example, will not ruin the whole scenario for me. In fact, such instances of linearity are probably, to a large extent, unavoidable and/or necessary. I also see your point about being able to actually solve the puzzle(or play the combat or whatever) making a linear scenario different than reading a book. But just barely on that last bit. Such a scenario is sort of akin to watching a movie or reading a book wherein you cannot progress to the next 'chapter' or 'scene' until you solve puzzle 'X' or defeat enemy 'X'. Interactive I guess but a RPG? I don't know... -------------------- "I am in a very peculiar business. I travel all over the world telling people what they should already know." - James Randi Posts: 219 | Registered: Saturday, October 13 2001 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 156
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 10:19
Profile
quote:I agree that this would not be "undramatic". My only contention here would be that such a scenario is, again, to much like sitting passively and reading a book. Tom Proudfoot's freeware Pirates of the Western Sea is a good example of non-linear RPG design. There is a main plot(even if not revolutionary in scope) and some linear elements(certain quests must be done which are common to ANY of the multiple endings) but basically, you can do what you want and go anywhere right off the bat. It is not obvious how you can do it but it is possible to steal a ship and set sail for any city or dungeon in the world, even as brand new PC + RPCs. It is advantageous to go see the mayor in the starting town and do his quests(typical 'kill the kobolds', then 'kill the goblins', then 'kill the ogres' et al) for experience but, if you can pull it off, it is also potentially advantageous to head for a large city and recruit an experienced RPC/NPC wizard or priest. The drama would not be heightened if Tom forced the player to do the 'beginner quests' through his narrative by limiting options, regardless of how good a storyteller he may or may not be. Most of the dramatic tension one feels when playing a RPG comes from the circumstances one is trying to overcome, regardless of whether one was 'forced' into those circumstances or one stumbled into them via unorthodox decisions. I suppose if you, as a player absolutely NEED to be told where to go next and what to do then this type of game will not appeal to you. quote:To an extent but not to the extent you indicate. quote:How so? When I spend xx minutes exploring some ruin and gathering loot and then realize that high level baddies have come up behind me, blocking my escape route(forcing me to either defeat them somehow or reload from WAY before I entered said dungeon) then I feel I am in real danger! quote:Why do you conclude that non-linearity eliminates the feeling or potential for "real danger"? [ Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:20: Message edited by: SkeleTony ] -------------------- "I am in a very peculiar business. I travel all over the world telling people what they should already know." - James Randi Posts: 219 | Registered: Saturday, October 13 2001 07:00 |
|
Triad Mage
Member # 7
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 14:01
Profile
Homepage
This pirate game you're talking about doesn't seem very interesting to me - it's a world to explore. So what? Doing quests just to get stronger to do more quests just seems like an idiotic progression. What village is so troubled that it is beset upon by goblins, kobolds, and ogres? -------------------- "At times discretion should be thrown aside, and with the foolish we should play the fool." - Menander ==== Drakefyre's Demesne - Happy Happy Joy Joy Encyclopedia Ermariana - Trapped in the Closet ==== You can take my Mac when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the mouse! Posts: 9436 | Registered: Wednesday, September 19 2001 07:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 14:27
Profile
Homepage
quote:Notice that this happens when those bad guys have eliminated some of your options. Not saying that there's no place for open-endedness/non-linearity, of course. The two can work together smoothly in the one scenario. In Revenge, the dream world sequences are short, intense and linear. The real world is more or less open-ended. Falling Stars follows a "Linear down the centre, open-ended around the edges" motif. But purely one-on-one, I think an entirely linear scenario (like An Apology) beats an entirely open scenario (like Wreck of the Slug) by a long way. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 156
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 16:24
Profile
quote:Don't base your evaluation on my oversimplified description. You may try it and not like it anyway but you are, as of now, conjuring misconceptions based on my concerns for brevity. POWS is no less story-driven than most of what is available for BoE or BoA. It just lacks the strict linearity that some feels is so necessary. It is also 2D and top-down(like BoE) so may not appeal to many BoA players. Not all of the quests(and certainly most of the dungeons) are integral to the main plot/story and some of the endings are easier and less satisfying to achieve than others and there are no scripted events forcing you to go from 'A' to 'B' to 'C', holding your hand the whole way. Still, it is free and has many interesting features. The combat is second only to Jagged Alliance 2 in terms of detail(and just barely so), allowing for various two-weapon options such as attacking with both, parrying with one etc. as well as aimed locations(you can aim for the neck, hands, vital organs etc.). This stuff may not interest you but it is a damned site better than BoA/BoE! Also, the randomized items make for insane replayability you don't find in most other RPGs. -------------------- "I am in a very peculiar business. I travel all over the world telling people what they should already know." - James Randi Posts: 219 | Registered: Saturday, October 13 2001 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 156
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 16:37
Profile
quote:Yes, but this is a chance event I am talking about. My party was not informed via scripted event that their ship was blown off course and when I awaoke I was in a dungeon with monsters blocking my escape or some such. Everything was rooted in MY decision-making and some unfortunate chance-events. quote:I agree. quote:I disagree but it does not help that you chose a notoriously mediocre scenario like "TWotS" to represent open-endedness and pitted it against An Apology. I would go even further to say that a competently designed/written non-linear scenario beats a masterfully crafted linear adventure by a LONG MILE! This is largely due to the fact that scenario and game designers are seldoim half the storytellers they think they are and computer games do not easily lend themselves to great writing anyway. Scenarios and CRPGS that try to masquerade as books come off like movies based on video games(i.e. Double Dragon and Mortal Kombat)...at best they are mediocre and yet pretentious storytelling affairs. When I want masterful scribery, I will turn to Gene Wolfe(The Book of the New Sun) or Dostoyevsky. When I want a fun computer game, I will NOT ask Gene Wolfe to write one for me. -------------------- "I am in a very peculiar business. I travel all over the world telling people what they should already know." - James Randi Posts: 219 | Registered: Saturday, October 13 2001 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 247
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 18:24
Profile
Homepage
Linear non-linear whatever. I suppose its up to the designer there's more than a single personality, so Scenarios should be the same. All linear scenarios would be just as boring as all non-linear scenarios. Variety is fun, I really don't think one is better than the other just biased one way or the other depending on the person aii. -------------------- The Knight Between Posts. Posts: 2395 | Registered: Friday, November 2 2001 08:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Wednesday, March 2 2005 18:26
Profile
Homepage
quote:[/b] Well, leaving the theory aside, I can't think of the last chance encounter I faced that was even slightly challenging. I dunno, maybe you get suprised and put into a tough situation by random wandering monsters, but it just doesn't happen to me. That, and chance encounters can't be tied into the storyline. So all you're doing is fighting a bunch of random interchangable enemies, which is just plain boring unless the engine is fresh and interesting. In the case of BoE, it certainly isn't. quote:[/b] The Wreck of the Slug was simply the best example of a purely open-ended scenario I could think of off the top of my head. Even most large wander-fest type scenarios (like AC1 and AtG) have a linear central storyline. I think I'll take you up on your challenge there. An Apology is a good example of a masterfully crafted linear adventure. Name me a competently designed non-linear scenario and we'll see how they stack up. Farmhands Save the Day? Exile 1? quote:Okay, I'll challenge you there again. You consider An Apology a mediocre and yet pretentious storytelling affair? And that's not even touching on your bizarre idea that one form of entertainment must never resemble another form of entertainment. [ Wednesday, March 02, 2005 18:28: Message edited by: Ash Lael ] -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 5415
|
written Thursday, March 3 2005 00:20
Profile
I'm not familiar with the third party BoE scenarios, so I can't say that An Apology "a mediocre and yet pretentious storytelling affair", but I will say that Bahssikava is a pretentious and mediocre storytelling affair. Canopy bludgeoned me with such horrible pretentiousness that I had to quit shortly after starting to play it. The problem with scenario makers claiming that they made all these restricting decisions in order to stay pure to the story is that: A) that's usually just a rationalization because it could have been done differently without changing the story one bit, B) staying pure to the story is sacraficing the game for the player's benefit for the designer's ego, and C) is a complete waste if the person can't make a competent story to begin with. Posts: 62 | Registered: Thursday, January 20 2005 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Thursday, March 3 2005 00:38
Profile
Homepage
Most designers are motivated to make scenarios mainly because they have a story to tell. To most designers, the plot is the important thing and the fact that others enjoy playing the scenario is incidental. Is it any wonder that they're willing to make sacrifices in other areas for the sake of telling the story they want to tell the way they want to tell it? I mean, really. The release of a scenario, even a mediocre one, is a service to the community, and one done with no compensation asked from those who stand to benefit from it. Is it too much to ask of you to let designers make the scenarios they want to make? -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |