How to Make Non-Linear Reactive Stories
One of my favorite phrases to throw around in a video game debate is that no amount of naming the chess pieces in a game after something will change the fact that you’re still playing chess. The chief preoccupation is still scoring a checkmate, having nothing to do with whatever title or meaning you’ve assigned to the pieces. It’s simply a way to shake up someone who thinks that all video games need to do is have a more sophisticated plot, a way to make them question the game designs and activities we’re actually doing in games. It also reminds people that the player input is what makes game plots so difficult to manage, though it’s also what gives them so much potential. Yet there must be a way to create meaning in a game despite that huge variable without constantly forcing the player’s hand. A couple of games that are coming on the horizon are exploring just that, as highlighted by a fascinating interview over at Gamasutra with Patrick Redding about Far Cry 2. I made a comment there that was just meant to summarize what Redding was trying to explain when one designs a non-linear plot. The writer creates a series of reactions that relate to one another like vignettes that inter-operate in the game. People seemed to take a shining to it, so after giving it some thought, I figured I should explore what the hell that actually means.
Long ago, at the young age when awkward boys are thinking up unique ways to impress girls, I opted to learn how to tell fortunes with a tarot deck. It was just something that fit my personality. This might shock you, but the real key is to not actually believe you’re predicting the future when you do a reading. Instead, pretend you’re giving someone an elaborate ink blot test. It’s like holding up a giant symbolic mirror that will, thanks to our mind’s natural inclination to assign meaning to chaos, create an incredibly personal and profound story for the subject. This means I don’t need to be in control of the meaning the cards create for a person, because I know the meaning they create will be far more powerful anyways. It also means they’ll take care of any flaws in the story I project at them. When I say a lively and energetic man is affecting your life, I don’t have to worry that I’m talking to a person surrounded by boring people. They will, by default, manipulate the data in their head until someone conforming to that image plugs in. So to explain how one might create narrative in a seemingly random video game, I’m going to explain how I can create narrative with a deck of cards.
The deck consists of 78 cards representing broad philosophical and personal concepts. The Magus is skill, wisdom, cunning. Death is transformation, change, and destruction but not literally death. You then have the lower arcana of wands (energy), cups (emotion), swords (logic), and discs (material affairs). These are like the houses of a normal deck of cards: each are numbered and represent states or emotions, the major arcana represent types of people or situations, and the ace is a massive concentration of whatever arcana it represents. Each of these cards are visually and descriptively designed to kick off something in your subconscious, and they do so with a variety of tools. I use Aleister Crowley’s Thoth Deck and I chose it because each card has a stunning amount of imagery on it. There’s phallic, vaginal, occult, and anything else they could pack into one little card. It is extremely unlikely that a person looking at one of these things is not going to have it register and connect with something in their head. Whether that association is positive or negative, tarot cards work as narrative devices because they deal with loaded symbolism that people naturally turn into stories. When I slap down the Knight of Wands, shown wielding flaming staves and thundering horses, I know the subject is both puzzled and creating connections without me saying a word.
Furthermore, in any narrative there is a great deal to be said for prepping your subject. I’ve experimented with a variety of reading methods and they almost all require the subject to shuffle the cards. While they do so, you have them think about what’s affecting them or what question they want answered. You do this to make sure the subject is already trying to turn the random symbols into a larger narrative. Other mediums use music, labels, etc. in a similar method: you prep your subject for thinking about a particular theme. The sad music in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is as much a signal for my brain to start referencing sad thoughts as the imagery itself. So I tell them to think about a problem in their life and that these cards are going to relate to that problem. Occasionally a person will be extremely helpful and tell me what’s on their mind, but most of the time I like the challenge of sniffing out the issue. This is probably what separates good fortune tellers from bad ones: the capacity to gauge a person’s responses to you. Fortunately, video games are going to be far better at this than me because they have all those graphs and feedback charts. There may still be a lot of cultural bias towards video games being anything except diversions or fun, but for a game that wants to impart a meaningful story one of the key aspects is letting the person know your intentions. As much as you might fear sounding pretentious, if you’re trying to say something complex and deep then don’t pretend otherwise.
So once you have a wide and universal array of symbols at your disposal and a subject who is thinking very hard about converting these symbols into something that means something, what is the final phase? The presentation. There are actually a lot of ways to do tarot cards, and most people choose based on their personal skills. I use the Celtic Cross method, which divides the draw into 5 groups of 3. One group represents the conflict, two are potential decisions for the user to make, and the other two are outside factors to consider. That’s a lot to work with, so that even if the subject does not really resonate with the central conflict group, they tend to perk up when I gloss over a successful future or interesting factors in their life. With so many topics to discuss, it means I don’t have to tell a perfect fortune, I just have to get my foot in the door. They’ll do the rest, the morphing and manipulating broad symbols into their life, all by themselves. There are other techniques for the tarot as well. The Egyptian method is to just draw cards until one hits pay dirt, then gloss the rest as significant in other ways. Others have their own unique set of symbols and claims for the subject. The result is always the same: if you mix broad symbols with proper presentation and carefully managed player input, you will have an impact on the subject.
It might surprise you that despite my own blunt perspective on the art of tarot, I still tell my own fortune a fair amount. When something is troubling me or I’m unsure about a choice to make, I break out the deck and follow the cards. Not because I expect good advice or even a solution, but because they help generate perspective. Like the ink blot test and sitting on your therapist’s couch, reading those cards makes me think about myself and my issue in a new way. Which is technically what narrative in most mediums is doing with symbols anyways. You find something you can relate to in a story and through that connection find profound meaning. Going back to more linear mediums, a popular symbol would be the mansion. From Faulkner to ‘There Will Be Blood’, that symbol of a big house, the wealth it implies, and its motivation to bloody-minded men is near universal. I don’t need Daniel Plainview to say another word in the film when he says he wanted a mansion as a kid, I and the vast majority of people know what it is to long for wealth. In video games, where interactivity creates such an impossible headache for writers, I think the tarot offers a lot of insights on how meaning can still be created in an environment where the author has little control. A series of reactions like someone crying for help if you shoot them or a dog following you if you feed it could be created in response to the player. Rather than worry about how these relate to some grand linear story, simply leave them as short vignettes that connect and relate to one another through A.I. With enough potent symbols and a willing subject, you don’t really need much control over the narrative at all. The player will create the story for you.
Comments
Aside from demonstrating the intrinsic symbolism people have, Tarot Cards can be used for random generation as well - which can help with keeping stories fresh and interesting.
The RPG “Blue Rose” has a fantastic personality generator, using Tarot Cards. Draw two cards: one card would be a virtue, and the other would be a vice. I cannot seem to find the photocopy I made of the chart, and I long since traded the book for Shadowrun 3rd edition.
Nonetheless, I believe a bit of random/procedural generation is needed, in order to make something truly non-linear.
Comment by David — August 5, 2008 @ 11:59 am
Thanks David, that actually reminds that a couple of games have dabbled with fortune reading scenarios. Quest for Glory III had a trippy sequence where the Gods judge you. You select a bunch of symbols and the game constructs a weird horoscope for you out of it. Definitely made the whole experience feel real and more personal. The early Ultima games usually asked the player a series of personal questions and then presented the player with what their choices “represented”. All very good at personalizing the stories of those games.
Comment by L.B. Jeffries — August 5, 2008 @ 2:25 pm
David’s comment strongly reminds me of Ogre Battle, an old SNES game. At the start of the game, you would draw Tarot Cards out of a deck and the game would ask you questions based on the cards you drew. It was a very elaborate way of deciding which of four “Lords” you would play the game as, but while you were doing it (assuming you weren’t trying to game the system to get a certain type of Lord) you were also investing this character with personality as you answered the personality-profile style questions.
Comment by Stuart — August 5, 2008 @ 4:04 pm
So then perhaps a mix of the two would be refreshing - using a Tarot throughout the game to judge the player’s personality, and altering the story based on those decisions procedurally? Hmm…
Comment by David — August 5, 2008 @ 5:42 pm
There definitely isn’t any one way to do it…but the idea in my head was to start thinking of in-game events, cut scenes, and dialog as stand-alone tarot cards. Since these are all shifting, not happening, or changing order due to player input, the tarot model makes a way for that to not be a problem.
So the way those events and reactions to player input are grouped is still a part of the game design, but you make it so the events can all connect together. Just like how a bunch of random cards gels together into a personal story about the subject’s future, a carefully written system of events and exchanges could inter-connect and still come together.
It’d be tough at first though. With technology as it stands now, the best bet would be to stay as abstract as possible. <i>Out of this World</i> could probably be adapted to such a model, and <i>Far Cry 2</i> really has my eye as exploring this as well.
Comment by L.B. Jeffries — August 5, 2008 @ 5:51 pm
Tarot cards were not designed for fortune telling or the occult. They were intended for nothing more than a card game which is still played today in Europe. It’s like spades or euchre. The tarot game is said to be superior to bridge and if there is a chess of card games, it might be tarot!It is a shame that in the 21st century, the media is still promoting these occult stereotypes regarding tarot cards. Tarot is for card games, people!
Comment by Joe from USA — August 5, 2008 @ 5:57 pm
@ Joe
Uh…right. Whatever their original or current purpose, some people invented a kind of game using a random shuffle and draw that creates stories. In the video game world, that’s one of the biggest puzzles developers are facing as they try to create more interactive stories.
“Tarot is for card games, people!”
Indeed, we are just discussing a type of game with them.
Comment by L.B. Jeffries — August 5, 2008 @ 6:48 pm
My opinions on tarot divination are based on my experiences with gaming and some later research I did on tarot cards. When I was involved with RPG type games I would use tarot cards in my campaigns and I wished I was more knowledgable about them back then because I think I could have made better use of them. This was before most people had access to the internet and I could not do the type of research I’ve done. Like most people I thought they were always part of the occult because the industry which sells them usually does not give us any clue about any other uses for them. Like Christians would stereotype the old D&D;type games, people selling tarot as divination are the ones stereotyping these gaming cards. Most American’s knowledge about tarot cards is confined to what some members of the Golden Dawn wrote about them and the decks they’ve created and influenced while in Europe people play real card games with them and they have a greater diversity of tarot cards to play with. I think we Americans have gotten the short end of the stick when it comes to these cards.
Comment by Joe from USA — August 5, 2008 @ 10:07 pm
*Googles Golden Dawn* The more ya know. Thanks for the heads up, Joe.
Expanding on the “Events as Cards” idea, I’m quite certain it would be easy to come up with a “Story Deck” of events, just by shattering the monomyth and organizing the pieces.
I’m getting tingly.
Comment by David — August 5, 2008 @ 10:20 pm
Great thought-provoking piece, L.B. It seems to me the player’s complicity in this process is pivotal. The person for whom the tarot cards are being read enters that process with some kind of faith or interest in a meaningful outcome. If he suspects he’s being duped or cheated, or if he believes the reader is a charlatan, the whole thing breaks down. As you say, even suspicious people can find a reading useful, despite their suspicions, but it’s a fine line.
So I’m wondering who the key person is in this exchange. The subject may suspend disbelief, but only in the presence of a reader who exudes special knowledge and authority. If we replace the tarot card reader with a machine (or console or computer), will this process still work? Will the player fill the gaps with meaning under these circumstances?
I honestly don’t know, and I’m not playing devil’s advocate here. Just wondering how much of the process you describe hinges on the human exchange, as opposed to the structural underpinnings of the event.
Comment by Michael — August 6, 2008 @ 2:55 pm
Hey Michael, the nice thing about that dynamic in fortune telling is that you can pass it around. Personally, I take the I-Ching approach to the cards. I explain the whole ink blot idea to the person and that it’s up to them to find the deeper meaning. So I reveal the process to them and shift the burden on them to “find” the meaning. I think a game could function under similar principles: explain the rules and how the story is constructed. Mix in fun game design, player input on which events are focused on…and suddenly you’re not pretending to create a story about them at all. They’ve invested so much into the process that it really has become a unique tale.
There are a lot of takes on this though. I mostly read fortunes with girls after dinner dates, so I’ve got wine and familiarity on my side. I’ve been to the French Quarter in New Orleans and forked over twenty bucks to see a pro work and it’s very different. Their definitions of the cards vary wildly from mine, they rely a lot more on their extra sensory abilities, and they aren’t afraid of being wrong occasionally.
The eery thing is that I often can’t tell if they’re thinking of it like I do or they’re actually using some sort of other-worldly sense. They are often much less ambiguous than me and right just often enough to impress me. Practice, practice I suppose…
Comment by L.B. Jeffries — August 7, 2008 @ 6:48 am
Fascinating article. There’s definitely a lesson to be learned from Tarot, when it comes to generating narrative. Of course, this is only one element of many when it comes to understanding the concept as a practical application.
In order for a player to really feel like they’re in the middle of a Story, the experience has to be equal parts player input and player *reaction*. In other words: procedurally generated outside events that happen *to* the player character, rather than because of or with. You’ll have a difficult time drawing out the feeling of immersion if there isn’t a Grendel out there somewhere harassing Mead Halls.
Leaving the in-game story up to a player to intuitively link vignettes based on logically-linked events and symbolism can only go so far. If you were to rely on it completely, it could end up giving the player the impression that they’re sort of aloof, aimless. At the same time, a designer specifically defining the larger goals defeats the whole point of a reactive game. Something is still missing.
Comment by Eugene — August 7, 2008 @ 6:09 pm
Yeah…you’re right, telling someone they’re going to receive a fun and magical story probably wouldn’t be enough carrot to justify the stick. In <i>Far Cry 2</i> I think they just announce that you’re there to kill this leader and bring peace between two rival factions. Maybe the objective could be random like the cards, maybe people would like it better if if there are a couple of solid “find the water chip and kill the mutant leader” objectives combined with the randomness
I dunno man, if I ever figure out what the missing fifth element of a video games is I’ll probably have to consider a career shift.
Comment by L.B. Jeffries — August 8, 2008 @ 7:39 am
Haha, that’s true. We wouldn’t want the process to become <i>too</i> automated, or all those poor designers and animators would be out of a job! :p
Comment by Eugene — August 8, 2008 @ 9:58 am
Nice article, though I nearly did a spittake at the “Sounds like an EVE Online Clone” caption.
One of the interesting things this makes me think of is Left 4 Dead’s AI director and how that’ll be expanded in the future.
Comment by GeorgeR — August 9, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
— PopMatters sponsor —
George - I haven’t heard about that. What are the plans for “Left 4 Dead"s AI?
Comment by Eugene — August 10, 2008 @ 2:45 am
Tarot is more than just a game.
Comment by Sup — August 20, 2008 @ 1:02 pm