Support NeoGAF

[Men_in_Boxes]

I've never viewed the word "trends" as a dirty word. Here is Sven Grundberg of Embark Studios explaining trends in a more nuanced, intelligent way... (timestamped for your convenience)

 

[digital_ghost]

 

[Guilty_AI]

"consequential play" is a really vague concept tbh. Very basic stuff like taking damage, dying and having to restart the level could also fall under it.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

"consequential play" is a really vague concept tbh. Very basic stuff like taking damage, dying and having to restart the level could also fall under it.

They might fall under the umbrella of consequential play but they're all pretty minor / uninteresting. The industry is finally waking up to what TV, film, and novelists have known for years. Great stories have great consequences.

 

[Guilty_AI]

They might fall under the umbrella of consequential play but they're all pretty minor / uninteresting. The industry is finally waking up to what TV, film, and novelists have known for years. Great stories have great consequences.

I think we shouldn't mix up consequence due to player agency and consequence within the realms of story telling. Specs ops: The line has a lot of "consequences" for the player's actions but they're pretty much all pre-determined by the script.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I think we shouldn't mix up consequence due to player agency and consequence within the realms of story telling. Specs ops: The line has a lot of "consequences" for the player's actions but they're pretty much all pre-determined by the script.

The mediums biggest strength is player agency, not script writing.

That means tying consequence to player choice is the revelation. Watching a predetermined script play out with little player choice/risk can only take the medium so far.

Embark, and a lot of other studios, are finally exploring this fertile area. Gamers seem to be a few years behind.

 

[Guilty_AI]

The mediums biggest strength is player agency, not script writing.

That means tying consequence to player choice is the revelation. Watching a predetermined script play out with little player choice/risk can only take the medium so far.

Embark, and a lot of other studios, are finally exploring this fertile area. Gamers seem to be a few years behind.

Problem is, player choice and consequences can negatively affect the narrative one may want to tell, there are dozens of movies and books with tragic ends and events that just wouldn't work if the main character somehow had the ability of stopping them as you would in a game with choices. The very act of choosing needs to be as much part of the narrative as the story itself.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Problem is, player choice and consequences can negatively affect the narrative one may want to tell, there are dozens of movies and books with tragic ends and events that just wouldn't work if the main character somehow had the ability of stopping them as you would in a game with choices. The very act of choosing needs to be as much part of the narrative as the story itself.

I think what Embark sees is what I see.

Games tied to a "story tellers vision" have already peaked, and may be starting to diminish. That trendline is pessimistic.

Games based on giving the player a world of possibilities (with risk) are relatively unexplored. That's the interesting trend line for game makers.

 

[realcool]

GaaS centered around gear fear?

I'll PaaS.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

"Giving player options" is what bad creators do to conceal their poor writing and lack of direction. It's the same reason for making a game open-world instead of linear.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

GaaS centered around gear fear?

I'll PaaS.

You don't watch TV shows or movies without risk. Why put up with it in games?