Master`s thesis

Transcrição

Master`s thesis

Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg
Department of Computer Science (FIN)
Department of Simulation and Graphics (ISG)
Computer Games Group
Referee and supervisor: Dr.-Ing. Knut Hartmann
Second referee: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Maic Masuch
MASTER’S THESIS
For obtaining the academic degree:
Engineer for Computational Visualistics
(Dipl.-Ing. für Computervisualistik)
Interactive Storytelling in Multiplayer Role-Playing Games
Submitted by:
Miss Jana Sieber
St.-Michael-Str. 7/8
39112 Magdeburg, Germany
Student ID 161565
Computational Visualistics 2000
07 September 2007
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
At this point I would like to thank all those persons who directly or
indirectly helped me with the accomplishment of the present Master‟s thesis.
My first thanks go to Dr. Knut Hartmann (Department of Simulation and
Graphics at the University of Magdeburg) for his supervision, his inspirations and
his understanding. I also am indebted to him for inviting me to write my Master‟s
thesis under his supervision and for his wonderful suggestion concerning the
thesis subject.
I also want to thank Prof. Dr. Maic Masuch (Department of Simulation and
Graphics at the University of Magdeburg) for the being second referee of my
work in spite of the aggravating circumstances.
Furthermore I am especially grateful for Lars Uebernickel’s (fellow student,
Computer Science) support with the implementation as well as for our ever
fruitful discussions and exchange of ideas. Additionally, thanks shall go to Hanno
Hugenberg (fellow student, Computer Science) for his support with the artwork.
Further thanks go to Niklas Röber (Department of Simulation and Graphics
at the University of Magdeburg) for his helpful advice concerning my research
work, and Maizatul H. M. Yatim (Department of Simulation and Graphics at the
University of Magdeburg) for her help with the case study.
I also need to thank Alexander M. Wolkow (Russian author, 1891 – 1977)
and L. Frank Baum (American author, 1856 – 1919) for their respective story
about the Wizard of Oz, as well as Leonid W. Wladimirski (Russian illustrator) for
his drawings in Wolkow‟s book, both being “involuntary” contributions to my
work that have been very useful.
Finally I yield Michael Freisleben, the four children Arron, Kelvin, Cedric
and Dustin, and the assistants of my case study, my fellow students Lars
Uebernickel, Hanno Hugenberg, Udo Petzel and Martin Pfeiffer, special thanks
for their selfless aid concerning the execution of my project experiment.
v
CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY
I certify that the work in this report has not previously been submitted for a degree
nor has it been submitted as part of requirements for a degree except as fully
acknowledged within the text.
I also certify that this report has been written by me. Any help that I have received
in my research work and the preparation of the report itself has been
acknowledged. In addition, I certify that all information sources and literature
used are indicated in the report.
Location
Date
Name
Signature
vii
ABSTRACT
The quite young research field of Interactive Storytelling, also being
referred to as interactive drama or digital storytelling, is currently object of
multifarious computer science research projects and interactive entertainment
conferences; yet it is still not entirely utilised and heavily debated.
There is no uniform definition for Interactive Storytelling making it difficult
to assign existing computer games to this genre. If excluding Massively
Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games the number of present Interactive
Storytelling computer games is wondrously small since the idea of playing
interactive, non-linear plots promises strong interest and increased gaming fun.
Some are subject of research projects but only few ideas made it onto the
commercial market. These again are only playable by single players though
recently an apparently strong trend emerged: Massively Multiplayer Online
Games. Games that can be played with other real persons seem to become more
popular than single player games.
Thus the present Master‟s thesis is motivated by a lack of existing games
and research projects that base on Interactive Storytelling wherein more than one
player is allowed to affect the development of the played story.
Hence, this thesis deals with the investigation of Interactive Storytelling as
multiplayer role-playing network game and contains elements of three different
game genres: Adventure, Interactive Storytelling and multiplayer role-playing
games. The underlying game concept will be presented, an exemplary
implementation described and the results by means of a case study evaluated.
Also its meaning for the subject area and future prospects will be examined.
The new concept comprises that a small number of multiple players shall
have the ability to commonly develop the story they play and affect its course.
Each player shall possess his own character as well as its special relevance for the
story of the game. This intention raises a difficult challenge since the complexity
of the plot increases with each additional player. Furthermore, a new aspect is to
be part of the game: the players shall be able to exchange their emotions and
thoughts on the game in order to make all decisions conjointly. This aspect creates
a second level alongside the narrative one: the social level.
Thus the questions to be answered are: Is an interactive drama for multiple
players more enjoyable than a single player game? If this is the case: What needs
to be considered if creating an interactive drama for multiple players, and which
difficulties and restrictions does it entail? If it is not the case: What are the
reasons?
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
1.
Page
Introduction ................................................................................... 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.
Motivation ................................................................................................. 1
Aims .......................................................................................................... 5
Project Intention ........................................................................................ 7
Fundamentals ................................................................................ 9
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.
Fundamentals of Multiplayer Gaming ...................................................... 9
Fundamentals of Adventure Games ........................................................ 12
Fundamentals of Interactive Storytelling ................................................ 15
Related Works ......................................................................................... 19
The New Game Concept ............................................................. 23
3.1
3.2
3.3
4.
Problem Analysis .................................................................................... 23
Concept Description................................................................................ 25
Evaluation Criteria .................................................................................. 34
Exemplary Implementation ......................................................... 37
4.1
4.2
4.3
5.
Requirements Analysis ........................................................................... 37
Software Architecture ............................................................................. 39
Implementation Details ........................................................................... 43
Case Study................................................................................... 47
5.1
5.2
5.3
6.
Design of Sample Game ......................................................................... 47
Execution of Case Study ......................................................................... 52
Evaluation of the Results ........................................................................ 58
Conclusion .................................................................................. 63
6.1
6.2
6.3
Summarisation ........................................................................................ 63
Future Prospects ...................................................................................... 64
Critical Evaluation .................................................................................. 68
Bibliography ........................................................................................ 75
Appendix ............................................................................................. 79
xi
ABBREVEATIONS
2D/ 3D
AAAI
AI
API
CGDC
GE
IDC
GUI
LAN
MOG
MMOG
MMORPG
NPC
HUD
VoIP
VR
two-dimensional/ three-dimensional
Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence
Application Programming Interface
(Computer) Game Developers Conference
Game Engine
International Conference for Interaction Design and Children
Graphical User Interface
Local Area Network
Multiplayer Online Games
Massively Multiplayer Online Games
Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games
Non-player Character
Head-up display
Voice over Internet Protocol (aka internet telephony)
Virtual Reality
“Someday [Interactive Storytelling] will be a new industry, quite distinct from
games. Right now, it's nothing, but it feels to me just like "the good old days" back
in the 1970s when computer games were fresh, untried, and bursting with
potential.”
Chris Crawford,
founder of the Game Developers Conference
xiii
Chapter 1: Introduction
CHAPTER 1:
1. Introduction
In this chapter will be described in which subject area the present Master‟s thesis
is located, which motivation led to it, which aims were set and how these are to be
achieved.
1.1
Motivation
This section shall clarify the underlying motivation of this research project
and Master‟s thesis. By what has it been initiated and why? What does the new
concept consist of and which problems are raised by it?
The first computer games wherein a story was in the foreground (that is,
games of which the focus is the playing of a plot) constituted the game genre
Adventure1. Contrary to other computer games that for example mainly focus on
competing with other players or scoring, classic Adventures contain a single
predetermined, hardly interactive story, played by a single player who starts at a
single preset initial point and has the aim of achieving one or more preset end
points of the game plot (representing beginning and ending of the game story). To
advance and experience this for the most part preset story is the main focus and
source of gaming fun of Adventures. For on the one side their mostly linear plot
allows the player only a limited and rather small number of freedoms of action
(mostly confined to the order of visiting places, solving riddles, conversations
etc.) and on the other side these actions mostly result in little influence on the
main story (if at all then mainly in different story endings).
Not long after the first Adventures the game developers realised that the
players of narrative games wished to have more influence on the story than
mainly to follow it almost as if watching a movie or reading a book (of which the
plots are fully linear and the stories entirely non-interactive) – for certainly it
would be more enjoyable and entertaining for a player to have more freedom of
action giving the own actions more meaning. Due to the technological progress
1
The first Adventures were text Adventures, i.e. visible to the player was only text that told the
playable story without any graphical elements. The first text Adventure was Adventure (aka
Colossal Cave), developed in the middle seventies by William Crowther und Don Woods; the
first graphical Adventure was Mystery House, published in 1980 by On-line Systems.
1
1.1 Motivation
Figure 1-1
Screenshot of The Curse of Monkey Island:
The love story between the player character
and a NPC is a strong emotional and narrative
element in all four Monkey Island releases.
© LucasArts 1997
back then it was still too early for truly interactive stories so game developers
broke the new ground with small steps: for example the player could choose from
a number of gaming styles that alter the nature of the further story by changing the
behaviour of the played character in the game2. The next step in story interactivity
was taken with Adventures that offered alternative endings, depending on the
decisions made by the player during the game (and rather close to the end of it).
Still these rather small “freedoms” weren‟t fully satisfying – neither for game
designers nor for players.
Already during the eighties attempts had been made to develop interactive
dramas3 – with insufficient success and contrary to the success of the very popular
gamebooks of that decade. Therein the reader could decide on the course of the
story by jumping to other pages within the gamebook depending on his choices.
But back then the limited storage capacity of discs, the large expenditure of
time and the high costs of productions allowed providing only few story variants
and alternative scenes for possible player choices and these again not much player
freedom and variety within the gameplay. Only lately interactive dramas have
overcome the old difficulties and appeared successfully as different kinds of
Adventures in the world of computer games4.
The question emerges why games that base on interactive storytelling are
becoming so popular (an indicator is the ascertainable increase of commercially
produced interactive-narrative games). Two main reasons can be extracted: story
and interactivity. Enthralling stories can be quite simple: good against evil, small
and weak become big and strong, man loves woman against obstacles –
nonetheless stories like Lord of the Rings (the main story can be summarised in a
few sentences!) lure crowds of people into the cinema and make them feel with
2
3
4
2
Done in the Adventure Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, published in 1992 by LucasArts:
In the middle of the game the player has to choose between an aggressive, diplomatic or teambased behaviour of his character. Before and afterwards the main story is hardly influenceable.
The first commercial interactive drama was Dragons’s Lair, published in 1983 by Advanced
Microcomputer Systems. It contained just a single successful storyline; the interactivity based on
making the right (successful) decisions - false player decisions resulted in the presentation of a
death-scene.
For example Fahrenheit (also named Indigo Prophecy), published in 2005 and developed by
Quantic Dream, or Deus Ex, published in 200 and developed by Ion Storm.
Figure 1-2
Screenshot of the MMORPG World
of WarCraft:
Multiple players playing together;
almost all game characters are
controlled by real persons.
© Blizzard Entertainment 2006
the characters or abduct them into other worlds, says P. Steinlechner.
[Steinlech04] Why would that be different for playing a computer game with an
entertaining, dramatic, and surprising story? Games that purely base on shooting
can mostly not keep up here (stories are even drawn on to make for example
shooters more enjoyable) – as little as movies or books with a bad or hardly any
story. (cf. Figure 1-1)
Now let us imagine the story could be controlled by the person who
experiences it and pushes it forward. Thereby this person becomes contributing
part of the story instead of watching it from the outside. What could be more
thrilling and enjoyable? The answer is: not being the only real person to influence
the participated story! Since mankind plays games those games played by
multiple players have almost always been enjoyed much more. Mostly playing on
your own is not as much fun, and computer controlled characters (aka non-player
characters; in the following abbreviated by NPC) are just no adequate replacement
for real human beings (at least at the current state of the art; the researches on
artificial intelligence might overcome this matter sometime in the future).
Game designers became aware of the multiplayer factor: a complete new
genre arose: “Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games”5 (in the
following abbreviated by MMORPG) being indeed extremely popular nowadays
(cf. Figure 1-2). Meanwhile, more than 25 years after the first played stories,
thousands of players meet online to play together an uncountable number of
smaller stories that behave like television series [Orive05] rather than classic
stories in books: the beginning, the propositions are well defined whereas there is
no ending. All the small, playable stories are integrated into a larger frame that
remains relatively unchanged by player caused events. The players‟ actions in and
the interactions of the players with the story world are relatively meaningless as
well as the existence of a character is. For only the character itself advances but
not his story universe.
5
For example World of Warcraft, published in 2004 and developed by Blizzard Entertainment.
3
1.1 Motivation
Then why not transfer this principle of not playing alone to classic
interactive-narrative games?
Altogether Interactive Storytelling in all its variations has taken a long and
very manifold way since the first Adventures with their mostly linear alternative
story-lines that could be chosen by the player but not be influenced, throughout to
story universes with large numbers of foreign co-players and small playable and
rather meaningless stories that are far away from the satisfying, captivating
dramatic structure until it reached real-interactive Adventures full of different
storylines, mutually dependent events and endings.
Nonetheless Interactive Storytelling games haven‟t reached multiplayer
status yet. But why is multiplayer gaming so fascinating and popular? Computer
antagonists are anonymous, have no personality and behave mostly quite dumb,
says Teut Weidemann from Wings Simulations. Real persons are unpredictable,
which makes the whole matter enthralling [Weidem04]. Mark Skaggs, producer of
The Battle for Middle-Earth, also sees a social component: People watch movies
in cinemas together, visit concerts and have coffee together. Playing computer
games together is just another form of spending time with other people
[Skaggs04]. Why shouldn‟t all this hold for Interactive Storytelling games as
well?
Thus the present Master‟s thesis is motivated by a new game concept: a
unique combination of Interactive Drama, Adventure and Multiplayer RolePlaying Game, initiated by the just now discovered lack of Multiplayer in
Interactive Storytelling. I expect that the extension from one player to multiple
players results in the same effects like almost every other game genre extended in
the same way: better entertainment, and more “enjoyability” and
“enthrallingness”.
The new concept includes that multiple players (in limited numbers, not
masses) shall have the ability to commonly develop the plot they are playing; the
course of the unfolding story shall depend on the players‟ actions. Thereby each
player shall possess his own character as well as his particular relevance within
the game and the emerging story. Furthermore they shall communicate with each
other enabling them to discuss game situations and make common decisions. This
aspect of the game concept creates a strong second level alongside the narrative
one: the social level. Both levels take up the same value in the new concept.
Interactive Storytelling yet comes with a certain difficulty: the dramatic art
of the story. A good story needs to be dramatic; this also holds for stories in
games and directly correlates with the gaming fun. However, in Interactive
Storytelling the game story needs to be interactive. That means its plot6 has to
contain alternative events. These alternatives make it now difficult to ensure a
dramatic course of the story that emerges by playing. The more freedom of action
concerning the plot is given to the player the more complicated gets the
maintenance of the dramatic art of the story the players unfold. The development
6
4
According to Aristotle's Poetics, a plot is "the arrangement of incidents" that (ideally) each
follow plausibly from the other. He divided it in three parts: beginning, middle and end.
[ArisBC]
Figure 1-3
The Dramatic Arc (simplified)
The story begins with an
introducing exposition, rises to
the point of highest suspense,
and ends with its resolution.
Fairy tales, movies etc. underlie
this approved classical narrative
structure.
of approaches to solve this problem which is raised by the interdisciplinarity of
interactive but dramatic storytelling represents the “holy grail” of Interactive
Storytelling.
Thereby one major problem to be solved is just the same as the one of
single-player interactive dramas: the challenge of combining a well-balanced and
dramatic plot for successful storytelling and the interactivity of the player so that
his actions noticeably influence the advance of the story [Hartm07]. Additionally
a second difficulty needs to be conquered: the establishment of the mentioned
social level, i.e., of really making decisions together and not each player on its
own. This new problem separates the new game concept from any existing related
works.
Thus the first, known problem is now raised to a higher level since it needs
to be solved for multiple players who shall all be able to sense the consequences
of their gaming actions onto the played story which in turn still shall follow the
dramatic arc7 (see Figure 1-3) – a complex challenge since it raises the image of a
huge space of actions and consequences. For the second, new problem it needs to
be examined how this matter can be realised in a multiplayer interactive drama.
How can the game designer get the players to work together for achieving a
common aim? How may cooperation be promoted instead of egoistic or even
antagonistic behaviour?
These problems and questions shall be solved by the present Master‟s thesis.
1.2
Aims
This section shall clarify what I want to achieve with the present research
project. The aim of this Master‟s thesis is a scientific one: it shall answer the
following questions: Does the new gaming principle work at all? Does an
7
The Dramatic Arc: Good drama is built on conflict of some kind - an opposition of forces or
desires that must be resolved by the end of the story. [Quince07]
5
1.2 Aims
interactive drama for multiple players even come as expected with more gaming
fun than single player interactive dramas? (The mentioned expectation arose
from the discussion in the previous section.) The accomplished thesis will provide
knowledge about whether the expectation could be confirmed. Does the new game
concept provide a lot fun-to-play? If yes: Why? And if not: Why not? Can an
interactive game story still be dramatic even if more than one player controls its
development, i.e., is Interactive Storytelling suitable at all for multiple players?
How do I intend to achieve this aim? Thereto a complete game concept of
an interactive drama for multiple players shall be developed and exemplarily
implemented. Afterwards a case study that uses the sample implementation will
allow examining the expectations as well as the answering of the arisen questions.
To allow a critical, useful examination of the project results evaluation criteria
will be defined serving the purpose of measurably evaluating the project. Thereby
it is important that the implementation represents the concept adequately since the
case study and evaluation criteria work on the implementation and not the
concept. (The implementation adequately represents the concept if each aspect of
the concept can be found in the implementation.)
Furthermore aims for the new game concept were set that differ from the
project aims. These are of rather practical nature and describe the following
appraisable final states and shall be attained as described in the following:
A) Story interactivity: The final story is a product of the actions of all
participating players (within certain, fixed limits, and excluding the
beginning).
In order for the story to be truly interactive the players shall be given a number
of alternative actions (that influence the development of the story) whenever
the player-character is active within the game. The players shall choose the
action to happen.
B) Narrative structure: The story is a drama, that is, it follows the dramatic arc.
To establish a dramatic arc on the played story the game shall begin with an
introduction of the players into the story creating a conflict and an aim that is
to be reached and that resolves the conflict. Between beginning and ending the
playable story cannot be completely free developed by the players but shall
stay within certain borders. This smaller space of events shall allow
maintaining the dramatic arc.
C) Fun factor of story: The emerged story is suspenseful, entertaining and
sensible.
The story shall become sensible by assigning each action with a sensible
consequence. For example, not saving the character or choosing a senseless
action could result in the death of the character in the worst case. Furthermore
some actions shall be purposeful whereas others shall not. This will provide
the option of making sensible decisions.
An entertaining and suspenseful story shall be achieved by providing the
players with surprising and rewarding story events. Also a lack of time in
solving a conflict situation shall increase the suspense of the players.
6
D) Flow of gaming fun: The players shall continuously be kept in the flow of
gaming fun.
This flow shall be perpetuated by making the game principle intuitive and
simple and the degree of difficulty well-balanced, i.e., challenging but not
frustrating.
E) Ratio of leadership & freedom: Concerning their actions the players are
content with the experienced mixture of leading and freedom.
To obtain the right mixture of leading and freedom the story shall not be
completely free developable but can deviate from a core story within certain
limits. Therewith is also achieved that players do not lose track of the goal of
the game.
Furthermore the leading shall happen by a game controlled guide that appears
as character of the story in the game.
After the end of this project a case study that uses the exemplary
implementation of the new game concept will enable me to judge if the project
aims could have been achieved and allow answering the raised questions.
Those who shall benefit from the results of the present Master‟s thesis are
predominantly players of primarily narrative games who also attach importance to
flexible, interactive plots. In the second instance, the field of Interactive
Storytelling shall profit from this Master‟s thesis since this research work is meant
to make a scientifically valuable, useful new contribution to it.
1.3
Project Intention
This section shall give an overview of this research project on Interactive
Storytelling for multiple players. Starting from the new game concept described in
short in 1.1 the intention of my research project will be portrayed now. The
realisation of the intention shall result in the achievement of the aims described in
the previous section.
First, after examining the start of the art in the field of Interactive
Storytelling and checking the eligibility of the new game concept, I will analyse
the two major problems that evolve from the new game concept and trace them
back to their causes. For these problems I will develop different approaches that
have the potential to solve them. On the basis of these approaches I will develop a
detailed and complete game concept representing an interactive drama for
multiple players. Thereby I will discuss diverse possibilities, further raised minor
difficulties and alternatives concerning the realisation of Interactive Storytelling.
In the following I will define criteria that are meant to allow a critical
evaluation of the quality, the abilities and the success potential of the developed
7
1.3 Project Intention
concept. These evaluation criteria will be of qualitative nature, thus not
measurable. To ensure expressiveness of the criteria each criterion shall evolve
from an aspect of the developed game concept.
Thereupon a requirements analysis will help me to determine the demands
of the concept on an adequate concept realisation. It shall clarify the necessary
functions and restrictions of the game software in general, as well as examine how
the implementation has to look like in particular since the implementation shall be
adapted to the intended case study.
On the basis of the analysed requirements the suitable software architecture
needs to be sketched providing a basic structure for the following actual, running
implementation. This specific implementation is going to not only be fully
adapted to the game concept but also to take in account the restrictions and
demands that a case study rises. Thus first of all a variable game story needs to be
generated suiting all aspects of the developed game concept.
Last but not least part of the intention is represented by a small case study.
This experiment firstly needs to be designed. Next I will develop a questionnaire
on the basis of the defined evaluation criteria. After the following execution of the
experiment with unbiased real human players the questionnaire is being used to
get to know the opinion the players concerning the new gaming principle.
Additionally the players shall be observed while playing in order to confirm their
answer from the interview. The statements of the participants shall then been
drawn on to a specific evaluation of the experiment results and a critical general
judgement of case study itself.
Finally the results of the case study shall provide me with the information
required to answer the questions the new game concept raised. At the end I will be
able to judge the success or the failure of this research project and to justify the
respective result.
8
Chapter 2: Fundamentals
CHAPTER 2:
2. Fundamentals
Within this chapter I will present the general and specific basics of the involved
research fields necessary to understand my motivations and my work described
later in chapter 3. Also an insight in relative works will be given.
2.1
Fundamentals of Multiplayer Gaming
Since multiplayer gaming will be an important aspect of the new game
concept the following section provides information about customary techniques of
multiplayer-playability in computer games. How can the multiplayer ability be
realised, which realisation is used for which kind of games, and is one of those
suitable for my needs?
Generally in the field of computer games Multiplayer Gaming means
playing with or against other real persons. Apparently there are three possibilities
where the cooperating or competing players can sojourn: firstly, all together at the
same physical place sharing the same computer and screen via multiple separate
input devices (A in Figure 2-1), secondly all at the same place using their own
computer, screen and input device (B in Figure 2-1)and thirdly each player at a
different physical place (not more than one player in a room) using his own
computer, screen and input device (C in Figure 2-1)) whereas for the both last
options their computers communicate via a network/ internet (cf.). Thereby the
choice of the setup depends on the multiplayer game itself, and sometimes more
than one of these are available within a game.
All three multiplayer variants contain a lot of similarities but also entail
differences that noteworthy influence the gaming with or against each other. What
do they have in common? Independent of where the players are located three
aspects of multiplayer gaming can be ascertained: on the one hand the underlying
Figure 2-1
Types of Player-ComputerRoom setting
(in the example of four players)
Green represents the players,
blue a computer (screen).
9
2.1 Fundamentals of Multiplayer Gaming
Figure 2-2
Screenshot of Quake II showing a
four players – split-screen
Each player has an own view on the
game.
© id software 1996
Figure 2-3
Four Wii Sports players sharing one
non-split screen
The game screen is visible in the upper
right corner. The players have the same
view on the game.
© Nintendo 2006
shared social gaming experience with other (real) people is very attractive; on the
other hand players are attracted by the opportunity of comparing their personal
performances. Furthermore, disadvantages of computer simulated co-players like
unrealistic and simple behaviour do not lessen the game fun.
What distinguishes them and wherein do their differences result? Multiple
players playing together at the same computer often share a single screen whereas
using separate, own input devices. In case due to the played game each player
needs his own, independent acting-perspective of the game the obvious solution is
represented by a split-screen (see Figure 2-2) dividing the screen into two or more
areas – one for each player8. Yet this possibility limits the number of players since
the screen shouldn‟t be divided more than four times for the sake of clarity and
size of each perspective. A common perspective is required if due to the kind of
game the screen or rather the game scene displays all players together which
results in a smaller view on the played character and the game environment (see
8
Round-based gaming could be another solution but were a strongly unsatisfying one nowadays
since only one player could be active while the others had to wait until their turn.
10
Figure 2-4
Screenshot of multiple players in the
MMORPG World of WarCraft
© Blizzard Entertainment 2005
Figure 2-3) (compared to single-player games). Above all one the hand the
number of players is quite small due to the limited space in front of a usual screen;
on the other hand these players mostly know each other personally.
In Multiplayer Online Games the players do not have to be in the same
“real” room and each player uses his own computer and screen unshared. The
game runs on a central server in a network and handles the displaying of the game
on the clients. (A mixed variant is represented by “LAN-parties”: many players
using their own computer but the same physical place.) However, this kind of
multiplayer gaming mostly requires a communication possibility between the
players that is being realised by chats or VoIP. Also the internet-players often do
not know each other in real life which seems to be quite popular since they can get
to know people from counties all over the world enabling them to make new, faroff friends. Additionally, the numbers of players is not limited. This freedom
resulted in the currently highly popular MMORPGs (see Figure 2-4).
Meanwhile multiplayer modes can be found in a several different game
genres such as the mentioned MMORPGs9, First-person shooters10, Real-time
strategies11 or Electronic sports12. (Evidently the genre of Adventure is yet not
being represented!)
The new game concept shall be a pure multiplayer game. That means I need
to decide on the type of setting which I consider as most suitable for the game
concept. This includes the location of the players, shared screen or separate
9
Popular MMORPGs are Ultima Online (Origin Systems 1997) and World of Warcraft (Blizzard
Entertainment 2005).
10
Exemplary First-person shooters are Unreal Tournament (Epic Games 1999) and Quake 3 Arena
(id software 2000).
11
Typical Real-time strategies are The Settlers 1-5 (Blue Byte Software, from 1993 on) and
WarCraft 3 (Blizzard Entertainment 2002).
12
The EA Sports series contain a lot of sport games, e.g. UEFA Champions League 2006-2007
and NBA Live 07.
11
2.2 Fundamentals of Adventure Games
screens, the players‟ view on the game and the kind of communication between
them. In the chapter 3 I will present my decision.
2.2
Fundamentals of Adventure Games
Another aspect is the classification of the new game concept into the
computer game genre of Adventures due to its narrative game principle being the
focus of the game. This section shall serve the purpose of dealing with some of
the relevant subjects of this genre since they will be part of the new game concept.
Generally Adventures are distinguished from other game genres by a story
of which the plot is to be unfolded by the player. They have a well defined
beginning (“exposition”) and one or sometimes more endings (“denouements”)
that are to be reached by the player by gaining information, talking to game
controlled characters, finding items and solving riddles.
Aside from that, Adventures (in the classical, “traditional” sense, i.e.,
excluding Role-Playing Games, Multi User Dungeons, Action-Adventures etc.)
are single player games. All characters apart from the one of the player are NPCs
that are exclusively controlled by the game but can be interacted with by the
player character.
An outstanding, often discussed and complicated aspect of Adventures is the
matter of linearity. In the field of narrative gaming there is no explicit, consistent
definition of what makes a plot linear or non-linear. Since the available
explanations are too weak for my needs I prefer to explain my understanding of
plot linearity separately.
To each Adventure a plot graph13 with a fixed structure can be assigned.
The emerging story of the game arises from the one taken path through this graph.
Due to this circumstance I want to mark out that, considered strictly, linear
Adventures can actually not exist. As soon as the plot branches – which is the case
in every Adventure (where do I let my character go first, etc.) – it cannot be purely
linear anymore. Basically, truly linear plots only exist in books, movies, etc. since
they offer no plot alternatives (see Figure 2-7 on p. 15).
Nonetheless the linearity of Adventures is often discussed (for example in
an interview with the game designers Wolfgang Kierdorf & Martin Lassahn – see
[KierLass05]) or in many cases often a factor in the appraisal of Adventure
games. But what from my point of view is mostly meant when speaking of a
13
Meant is the graph from the graph theory: a geometric set of nodes that are connected by edges.
The nodes of a plot graph represent scenes; the story is one path along its lines. The plot itself is
therewith a sequence of story events.
12
Figure 2-5
Screenshot of the player’s
decision point in Indiana
Jones and the Fate of Atlantis
Choice between Wits Path”:
more difficult, “Fists
Path”: lighter puzzles
and lots of fights, or
“Team Path”: easier
due to support of a
NPC.
© LucasArts 1992
linear plot design is the non-variability of the order of solving riddles and of the
way of solving tasks. That is, the order of key points is fixed, with key points
being user decision points that advance the development of the story (for example
solving a riddle but not going to the left).
If now accepting the latter meaning then Adventures cannot simply be
classified as fully linear or non-linear; it would be more sensible to speak of their
degree of linearity since most of them (if not all) are rather partly linear than
totally or not at all14. (If considered strictly, linear parts can only be parts of no
user interaction, for example cut scenes etc.) Therewith an Adventure can be
mostly linear until short before the end when the player‟s acting decision results
in one of the multiple available endings. Such a decision can certainly alter the
further story at any point in time of the game (cf. Figure 2-5) but not necessarily
has to.
To summarise, the player‟s degree of freedom in action is what separates
linear and non-linear parts of the plot – his actions push forward the story and can
but not necessarily have to alter the story (the pure pushing forward I call “weak
narrative consequence”) (cf. Figure 2-7).
Which effects does a linear plot have then? If compared, the linear parts
push the plot whereas the non-linear parts convey the feeling of gaming freedom
to the player. Coming back to the aspects of the narrative structure of Adventures,
then from a game designer‟s point of view a linear design is less complex but
easier enables establishing a dense dramatic arc (cf. Figure 1-3 on p. 5) and
furthermore results in rather a film than a game. On the other side complex a nonlinear plot creates a wide scope of player actions that yet makes it more difficult
to establish a dense, self-contained story dramaturgy. Thereby a too strong
linearity can discourage the player whereas a too weak linearity could intimidate
him [KierLass05].
14
An example for an Adventure with a larger degree of linearity is Broken Sword: The Shadow of
the Templars (Revolution Software 1996) due to the little variety of the order of solving riddles
and visiting places. A rather little linear Adventure is Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
(LucasArts 1989). It contains the “indy quotient”, of which the maximum points can only be
reached if all riddles are solved and all solution methods were taken, in fact only by playing
more than once.
13
2.2 Fundamentals of Adventure Games
Since the just mentioned dramatic art is a very important aspect of the new
game concept I will go into this subject in the following. The characteristic of the
emerging story is the underlying narrative structure that is known from, for
example, tales or movies: the dramatic arc. This claim makes the designing of
Adventures interdisciplinary: designers of narrative games must consider the rules
of game design as well as the rules of dramatic narration – a nontrivial challenge
since both are already on their own not simply to be mastered. The purpose of
following the dramatic arc in narrative games is just the same as for any other
narration: namely, making the story enthralling and entertaining, that is,
motivating the recipient of the story to get to its end.
But how can the dramatic art of game stories be ensured? Herein the degree
of linearity plays an important role for it is easier to make the story of a mostly
linear plot dramatic than of a rather non-linear one. The reason is the increase of
the variety of the story events with the increase of the non-linearity. Since the
order of story events is predefined and fixed in for the most part linear plots, the
game designer is able to map certain story events to certain parts of the dramatic
arc. For example, he may map a story event which is in the middle of the plot to
the climax of the dramatic arc by designing this event as a large conflict.
However, in a non-linear Adventure the action sequence is at many stations of the
plot variable – the player-dependent path through the graph traverses only some
of the graph nodes. In spite of these variations the game designer must guarantee
Figure 2-6
Schematic graphic of the mapping of the dramatic arc onto a partly non-linear
(A) and fully non-linear plot graph (B)
The blue nodes refer to “stations” (A) or “sections” (B) which mirror important
parts of the (simplified) dramatic arc (in brown).
14
Figure 2-7
Plot linearity and plot structure (considered strictly)
(The grey text is not valid for classical Adventures.)
that the player reaches the climax, independent of which action decisions the
player makes. To achieve this there are two possibilities: firstly, integrating
stations in an otherwise non-linear plot (that therewith is being interrupted by
linear parts) where all previous strands run together (see A in Figure 2-6., and
secondly, a complete non-linear plot that is divided into sections according to the
respective parts of the dramatic arc (see B in Figure 2-6). One section contains for
example multiple conflicts of which one the player passes for sure. This second
solution is more complicated and time-consuming; moreover the player is not able
notice the difference except he plays again and acts different from before.
Which plot type is the suitable one for the new game concept? This question
will be answered in chapter 3.
2.3
Fundamentals of Interactive Storytelling
As the title of the thesis already reveals Interactive Storytelling is an
important part of the new game concept and shall be examined in short now. I will
give a brief terminological introduction into this field and an insight into the
known corresponding problems since the new game concept will strongly be
confronted with them.
The research field of Interactive Storytelling is rapidly developing, and
since its emergence many people - game designers as well as research groups have dealt with the central question: What in special makes a story interactive?
15
2.3 Fundamentals of Interactive Storytelling
To answer this question I consulted a large amount of respective literature
but I was not able to find a unified statement since the opinions widely diverge.
(e.g., [Chrawf04], [Mateas02], [Meadows03], [Miller04], [Mosel05], [Sander06],
[Szilas99], [RieYou05], [Ryan01] and [Trogem02]). Due to this circumstance I
will define Interactive Storytelling myself, in fact, in consideration of the new
multiplayer game concept. I consider an interactive story as story of which the
development is being altered by the watcher/ listener/ reader/ player (from now on
“recipients”), even if this influence is only small. Therefore an interactive story
cannot be unchanging; what is variable is its degree of interactivity. For example
some Adventures offer different story endings whereas the rest of the story is not
alterable by the player – this represents little interactivity; different from
gamebooks, which provide the reader with several opportunities of affecting the
further development of the story between its beginning and end. Thereby the
following must be pointed out (specified for digital games): in most cases of story
interaction the player can only choose from a limited and rather small number of
story development possibilities rather than freely determine it. In this case he
rather appears as director than author, that is, author is the game designer who
provides an automatic telling of the story. For this purpose the plot structure needs
to be predefined and fixed which means that all plot graph nodes (cf. previous
section) and all the connections between them cannot be changed by the player.
To allow the player the appearance as author (the plot structure would have to be
flexible and open) he must be given free authoring possibilities – quite easy to
realise in interactive theatre, basically impossible for gamebooks, and difficult but
Figure 2-8
Connectivity of plot linearity and story interactivity (strict)
The blue text shows the areas of Interactive Storytelling.
16
possible for narrative computer games (namely in form of authoring tools).
Concerning Adventures with a directing player I see two “layers” in the
unfolding story: firstly the background story or core story; secondly the filling,
rather weak narrative part of a story. The consequences of the player‟s decisions
can – depending on his degree of freedom of action – either alter only the weak
layer or both layers: solving which riddle when would not alter the background
story but only push it forward; deciding to take the money or rescue the princess
alters the background story itself. A truly interactive drama must provide strong
narrative acting consequences while at the same time provide the classical
narrative structure like fairy tales or movies! (cf. Figure 2-8)
I will now come to the central difficulty of Interactive Storytelling since I
will have to deal with myself. As soon as a story becomes interactive the author
has not any more full control over its course. Depending on the degree of the
given influence on the story development a dramaturgical problem evolves. The
central difficulty of designing an Interactive Drama has been formulated best by
Knut Hartmann: the combining of dramatic storytelling and player interactivity.
Thereby attention needs to be paid to the two following contrary requirements: on
the one hand a well-balanced and dramatic plot is essential for a successful story
and on the other hand giving the player multifarious interaction opportunities in
such a way that his actions noticeably influence the advance of the plot by.
[Hartm07] Diverse research groups have developed approaches that move away
from fixed plot structures and enable total new game concepts. P. Bailey divided
previous works on automatic storytelling in these three groups: “author models”,
“story models” and “world models” [Bailey1999]. I will not go into these
approaches but instead provide an overview of different types of plot structures
since I have to decide on an appropriate plot structure for the new game concept.
The diagrams Figure 2-9 to Figure 2-11 on the next page are some examples
on interactive narrative plot structures and shall deliver a small, comparative
insight into their attributes, qualities and application. Their plot structures are
divided into nodal, modulated and open. In Table 2-1 on page 19 I compare these
three types of plot structures with regard of design, dramatic art and their degree
of interactivity.
Which type of plot structure will be the most suitable for the new game
concept I will explain in chapter 3.
17
2.3 Fundamentals of Interactive Storytelling
Figure 2-9
Example for a Nodal Plot Structure
© M. St. Meadows 2003
Figure 2-10
Example for a Modulated Plot Structures
Figure 2-11
Example for an Open Plot Structures
18
Nodal plot
structure
series of noninteractive events,
interrupted by points
of interactivity
Design
Dramatic Art
Degree of
interactivity
Application
Modulated plot
structure
no fixed order of
events
Open plot
structure
series of points of
decision that carry
recipient to next
point and so forth
supports the
does mostly not
classical dramatic
support the dramatic
arc, but lesser than
arc
nodal plot structures
low degree of
recipient can
high degree of
interactivity
determine the degree
interactivity
of his interactivity
e.g. used in the
e.g. used in
e.g. used in the game installation Memex
character- or
Deus Ex15
Engine16
environment
developing games
supports the
classical dramatic
arc
Table 2-1
Comparison of the three types of plot structures
Source: [Meadows03]
2.4
Related Works
In the chapter Introduction I described which open questions the new game
concept brought up. In this section I will examine if similar approaches are able to
answer the central question, namely, if Interactive Storytelling works for not only
single but also multiple players. The following exemplary selection shows games
which bear the most resemblance with the new game concept.
In the year 1999 an interactive drama for children appeared on the market:
Schneewittchen und die sieben Hänsel (in English: Snow-white and the seven
Hansel) developed by Tivola Verlag GmbH, Berlin (cf. Figure 2-12 on the page).
The particular matter about this game is the plot: crossing strands that base on
three well-known stories: the fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm, Snow White,
15
Deus Ex, developed by Ion Storm in 2000, combines action elements of an ego-shooter with the
character development of a role-playing-game and the story of an Adventure.
16
The Memex Engine is an interactive installation by Marc Lafia.
19
2.4 Related Works
Figure 2-12
Screenshot of Schneewittchen und die
sieben Hänsel
The player is asked to decide on the
walking direction of the actually
played character.
© Tivola Verlag GmbH 1999
Little Red Riding Hood and Hansel and Gretel17. Apart from that this game is a
quite classical Adventure, using classical 2D graphics. The stories are being
automatically generated and are told in sequences of each with ten pictures. A
large number of hotspots in each picture that result in speech, animations, music
and sounds make the game be intensively experienced and integrate the young
player into the events and bind him emotionally. Also, the game allows reaching a
number of “false ends”; right ends are reached when telling the tales traditionally
correct by making the suitable decisions. The specialty about this game is the
aspect that the player controls three instead of usually one character, and that
these player characters (and therewith the player) are being accompanied by three
NPCs in order to provide the player with the feeling of not being alone. The
underlying implementation is not public; yet it is know that the dramatic structure
is being ensured by a fixed, mostly non-linear plot structure with a rather small
number of alternatives. The story is interactive since the player‟s decisions result
in a respectively different development of the unfolding story. (cf. [Kolloff00])
A completely different kind of game with an interactive story is represented
by Deus Ex and its successor Deus Ex: Invisible War18. These Action RolePlaying Adventures have been developed by Ion Storm and published in the year
2000 and 2003 respectively. Both instalments comprise a few differences but are
very similar at their core; I will therefore not distinguish between them. The plot
takes place in the year 2050 and is being referred to as conspiracy thriller: its main
character becomes entangled in a deep and ancient conspiracy but extraordinarily
the player is not provided with one aim to strive for. Instead he is continuously
being challenged by coherent but competing aims and purposes; correct or
incorrect decisions concerning the reaching of the end of the games do not exist.
The role-playing aspect of the games evolves from the circumstance that the
player character hardly has a personality and back history, can be adjusted by the
17
All three tales have been published by the Grimm Brothers in the German fairy tales collection
Kinder- und Hausmärchen (Grimm's Fairy Tales) in 1812.
18
Official website: http://www.eidosgames.com/games/info.html?gmid=50 and
http://www.eidosgames.com/games/info.html?gmid=125 resp.
20
Figure 2-13
Screenshot of Deus Ex
The screen contains the character‟s
health system (upper left corner), an
inventory (bottom edge) and the
character‟s abilities (upper right side).
© Ion Storm 2000
player and can furthermore train its abilities or upgrade his body or gear. They
take place from a first-person perspective, playing from a character's eye view in a
3D environment. What also classifies the games into the Ego-Shooter genre is the
large share of battling and the health system of the character (cf. Figure 2-13). Yet
the second instalment can be played through without any fights. This in turn is an
important aspect of the interactive story: for the player‟s decisions to affect the
story all situations are designed in a way that they can be approached from
multiple directions. The player is thus enabled to be creative and find his own
solutions - many of the occurring problems are in turn similar to riddles as know
from Adventures. Again the implementation is neither open nor documented only
allowing me to derive conclusions concerning the structure of the plot or other
realisation details. The plot seems to be mostly non-linear interrupted by fixed
linear stations that probably serve the purpose of ensuring a dramatic course of the
unfolding story. (cf. [Lott00])
Again a completely different interactive drama represents Fahrenheit19
(aka Indigo Prophecy) that has been developed by Quantic Dream and
commercially published by Atari in September 2005. It is classified as Action an
Adventure and also referred to as an Interactive Film20. Even the Adventuretypical inventory has been replaced by an elaborate, complex keyboard control to
intensify the impression of experiencing a movie. In this game the player shall
investigate why his character committed murder since the latter has no memory of
it. Thereby the player is given the opportunity to alter the actions of the character
but the overall story itself remains relatively unchanged (except if the main
character dies). The dialogues do not branch out either but the chosen actions
influence the mood of the character. Every now and then story is being interrupted
for the purpose of getting to know the characters better. The specialty about this
interactive drama is that the player can slip into three different characters at
19
20
Official website: http://www.atari.com/fahrenheit/
The games scenes of this sub-genre mostly consist of full motion video; these are presented to
the player as result of his actions. The first commercial interactive film is Dragon’s Lair,
developed in 1883 by Advanced Microcomputer Systems.
21
2.4 Related Works
Figure 2-14
Screenshot of Fahrenheit
The new MultiView-System showing
the plot from different perspectives at
the same time.
© Atari 2005
different stations of the game. For this a new feature was developed: the
MultiView-system. If several events occur at the same time the GUI is divided into
multiple windows showing the respective perspective of the characters or other
events. The opinions about Fahrenheit strongly diverge but some judge it as
“masterpiece of Interactive Storytelling” due to the curious exploring of the
world, the dramatic relationships between the characters and the thrilling
immersion. Since Fahrenheit is a commercial software product I was not able to
gain insight into the underlying implementation; yet the underlying plot structure
appears to be fixed and preset. (cf. [Schmidt05])
In Table 2-1 I provide an overview of the described games in consideration
of the aspects that are relevant for the new game concept. The investigation
entailed that none of these games provide interactive storytelling for multiple
players and are therefore not able to answer the central open question: if the new
gaming principle (Interactive Storytelling by multiple players) works at all. This
ascertainment creates an open problem which requires the development of a
concept having the designated attributes (interactive and dramatic story for
multiple players). This concept will be presented in the now following chapter.
Multiple player
characters
Dramatic art
Degree of story
interactivity
Role-Playing
elements
Multiplayer
ability
Snow-white and …
Deus Ex I & II
Fahrenheit
yes
no
sometimes
yes
yes
yes
medium
relatively large
medium
no
yes
no
no
not related to the
story
no
Table 2-2
Comparison of the three presented games basing on Interactive Storytelling
22
Chapter 3: The New Game Concept
CHAPTER 3:
3. The New Game Concept
Within this chapter I will portray the concept of the game. Firstly a problem
analysis will help to identify the main problems that emerge from the concept and
their causes, succeeded by a presentation of the game concept, and ending in
defining criteria that shall allow a critical evaluation of it.
3.1
Problem Analysis
This section serves the purpose of tracing back the problems identified in
the section Motivation (sec. 1.1) to their causes and developing approaches for
solutions in order to ensure the problem relatedness of the developed solution.
Due to the requirements of the new game concept I could discover the
following two major problems:
1) The first major problem arises from the new game concept itself, being an
interactive drama for multiple players. It derives from an old, already know
problem from the field of Interactive Storytelling: the challenge of combining
a well-balanced and dramatic plot for successful storytelling and the
interactivity of the player so that his actions noticeably influence the advance
of the story. But with the new game concept this known problem is now
raised to a higher level since it needs to be solved not for the usual one player
but for multiple players: For these shall all be able to sense the consequences
of their gaming actions onto the played story which in turn shall still follow
the dramatic arc. I assign this problem to the dramatic level of the new game
concept (a closer explanation follows in the next section).
2) The second major problem is an entirely new problem that evolves from the
chosen gaming principle: the multiple players shall have the ability to
commonly develop the story they are playing. But players of Multiplayer
Games are mostly used to and/or willing to make their action decisions on
their own, independent of the co-players; such behaviour would contradict the
designated cooperative game principle. Therefore they shall be encouraged to
work together, to establish a relationship that allows each player to
satisfyingly take part in the playful, common decision making. This problem I
assign to the social level of the new game concept (a closer explanation will
be given in the next section).
23
3.1 Problem Analysis
In short, the problems can be formulated as the following questions: How
can a dramatic structure be guaranteed even though allowing multiple players to
control the development of the story? How can cooperative acting be supported?
Certainly a number of minor difficulties are evoked by the new game concept as
well but these require no closer examination. They will be mentioned while
describing the game concept in the next section as well as their solution.
In the following I will examine where the two major problems originate
from. The two identified major difficulties result from entirely different causes.
The first problem arises from an increase of the known problem of Interactive
Storytelling: the extension of the player number from one to multiple players (that
is, approx. two to six). Why does this extension increase the known problem? To
be able to answer this question it is necessary to know about the causes of the
known (single player) problem foremost. This matter I already discussed in the
Fundamentals of Adventure Games in section 2.2. Summarised, there is no
random element in the development of the story that had to be considered by the
game designer since the story of non-interactively narrative games is
unchangeable. If, however, the player is given the ability to influence the story
development he would try to avoid conflicts but a dramatic structure must contain
a conflict of some kind. Thus the unpredictability of the player concerning his
narrative gaming behaviour reduces the control of the game designer over the
dramatic story structure. If increasing the number of players this random element
also increases, that is, the dramaturgic controllability is being reduced even more.
Since a fixed, linear plot structure excludes the interactivity of the story, and an
open plot structure entails no dramaturgic control at all, I could chose the two
following options that base on the methods of making Adventures plots dramatic
(cf. section 2.2):
1 a) One possibility is a fixed and predefined, entirely non-linear plot graph that
the game designer divides into sections that map the respective parts in the
dramatic arc (see B in Figure 2-6 on p. 14).
1 b) The other possibility is also a fixed and predefined but mostly non-linear
plot structure which is interrupted by linear points that map certain story
events onto elements of the dramatic arc (see A in Figure 2-6 on p. 14).
The causes of the second identified problem (to encourage cooperative
gaming behaviour) are of completely different nature. What might be the reason
for the rather arbitrary than joint behaviour of players? One reason could be the
human nature: the desire to compare with others, to test the own abilities, the
motivation to be better than the co-players. Another reason could be the
circumstance that players are simply more used to competitive Multiplayer
Gaming (e.g. Ego Shooters) or Multiplayer Games with egoistic acting (e.g. RolePlaying Games) – seldom Multiplayer Games require cooperative gaming
behaviour21 since they use the emerging conflict to build up the desired suspense.
21
An exception for MMORPGs are some of the “quests” in World of Warcraft which can only
successfully be accomplished if a group of players works together. An exception for EgoShooters represents the game mode “co-op“: fighting the NPC enemies in a team.
24
Since my game concept shall be suspenseful although the players cooperate I need
to find another source for suspense. This source shall be provided by the player: a
conflict in form of a catastrophe that affects all players represents a suitable
solution, as well as continuous small conflicts that they players shall master with
cooperation.
How can the desire to compete with the co-players or to act egoistically be
overcome? In a narrative game that shall be enjoyable the game designer can
impossibly design the game in a way that exclusively cooperative actions are
possible – the valuable freedom of action of the player would be curtailed, and the
realisation quite difficult. If thus avoiding egoistic behaviour is not realisable then
the left possibilities can only base on motivating cooperation:
2 a) One method to motivate cooperative gaming behaviour could be the setting
of a common aim by the game designer (representing the author) that the
players can only reach commonly – egoistic acting is thus not a successful
strategy.
2 b) Another method could be to design the consequences of the player actions
in a way that they affect the other players – positively or negatively, that is,
the co-players will react correspondingly and influence the behaviour of this
player.
2 c) A third possibility would be the punishing of antagonistic or egoistic actions
and the rewarding of cooperative behaviour.
Thus the problem analysis revealed the causes of the two problems that
evolved by the new game concept and has provided a basis for developing
possibilities of solutions. In the next section I will explain which solutions I have
chosen for what reasons and portray the realisation of the chosen solution
strategies in detail and fit them into a complete game concept.
3.2
Concept Description
In this section I will portray one possible realisation of the new game
concept that I described in the Motivation (sec. 1.1).
Introductory, I will summarise the new game concept briefly. It represents a
Multiplayer Role-Playing Game on the basis of Interactive Storytelling. Existing
interactive dramas are playable by only a single player. The new game shall be
playable by multiple players, in fact two to six players (thus different from
MMOGs). The players shall commonly develop the story they are playing; the
course of the unfolding story shall depend on the players‟ actions. Thereby each
of the players is to possess its own game character as well as its special relevance
25
3.2 Concept Description
Figure 3-1
The connection of the dramatic and the social level (by the
example of two players)
The interaction of the players is represented in the game as the actions
of their characters. These result in the development of the story.
within the game. Due to its narrative nature I refer to this part of the new idea as
the dramatic level of the game.
Furthermore some kind of communication between the players shall enable
them to discuss game situations like conflicts and make all decisions commonly.
This part of the new idea creates a strong second level besides the narrative one:
the social level. Figure 3-1 shows the connection of the dramatic and social level.
The players shall be seen as a kind of directors whereas the game designer is
the author of the story universe as well as its dramaturge. He prepares the players
with rules in order that the players know how to behave in the game world. Focus
of the development of the plot is the motivation of the players which can be
different from the motivation of the characters they play [Walk05]. That means
the players affect the development of the story by using their characters without
being the characters.
I will now present one realisation of this game concept, starting with its
multiplayer feature.
3.2.1 Realisation of the Multiplayer Aspect
A very important part of the new game concept is the number of its players.
I limited the maximum number of players to two to six since I consider it as
almost technically impossible to obtain a sensible interactive story for more than
approx. six players. This number I derived from stories in books and movies in
26
which there are very seldom more than six main characters – the usual number is
even rather two to four. Due to this reason the number of players cannot vary: it
must be fixed already at the start of the game since every main character of the
story is assigned to exactly one player, and the number of main characters is fixed
per story. (Of course a variable player number is not entirely impossible but the
complexity of a realisation would practically explode if the story shall be sensible,
coherent and dramatic.)
Where shall the two to six players be located? My choice is dependent on
two factors: every player needs to have an own private view on the game world
(this circumstance will be explained later in subsection 3.2.3). Additionally, I
intend to establish an externally enforced, stronger concentration on the game, i.e.,
a deeper immersion into the game world. In the Fundamentals of Multiplayer
Gaming (sec. 2.1) I examined different types of settings (cf. Figure 2-1)
concerning players-computer-location. Setting A (all players share one screen) is
not suited since it does not allow a private player view. In turn, setting B (all
players have their own computer and are together in the same room) does allow
one but this kind of setup would be unsuitable due to the distractions of the
environment and especially of the co-players. A deep immersion would not be
given. Setting C (each player has an own computer in separate rooms) provides
not only the private player views but also the desired immersion. Due to these
reasons the only sensible choice is to use settings C.
Thus the players can but do not need to know each other and can be far
apart from each other; therefore the new concept will be realised as a network
game. Nonetheless the players must be given the ability to communicate with
each other. There are two possibilities to realise this demand: a chat or a telephone
conference. I chose the latter since it is able to transmit emotions better than a chat
could; it would also cost too much time for typing what shall be said. To further
increase the immersion the players shall use headsets; these also emphasize the
communication and the social aspect.
The choice of separated players using headsets to communicate is expected
to provide more intensive gaming fun.
3.2.2 Realisation of the Role-Playing Aspect
According to the game concept each player is to possess its own game
character as well as its special relevance within the game. That means every
player character differs from the other player characters by its back history and the
consequential motivation. The players shall be provided with this information in
order to enable them to choose the preferred role. This game element is a typical
element in RPGs. In this game genre the aim of the player is mainly to advance
his character while exploring the huge game universe by improving his skills.
However, in the new game concept the players will not be given the opportunity
to decide on the abilities of their characters or on their look, attributes, etc. For
these are ascertained by the story; the whole plot bases on the characterisation of
the players [Egri46] (see „story mechanisms‟ in Figure 3-2Figure 3-3). If allowing
the players to “adjust” their characters the resulting story mechanisms would
change and therewith the game mechanisms (see Figure 3-2): This would make
27
Figure 3-2
Application of story mechanisms to game mechanisms
The modelling of the game mechanisms depends on the pre-given story mechanisms.
the preparation of a coherent and dramatic plot graph unfavourable complex and
complicated.
Nonetheless, this “individuality feature” is given a new purpose: In the
game the players control individually skilled characters so that not all characters
are equally suited for coping with the provided riddles and conflicts. This
character modelling shall be realised by providing the players‟ characters with
personal desires, specific attributes, abilities and fears which in turn are being
provided by the story. This in turn shall make the experienced story richer and
allow the players to still be meaningful and unique personalities in a game
wherein they shall make all decisions as a group. This individuality is expected to
increase the gaming fun as well as the desired communication between the
players.
3.2.3 Realisation of the Interactive Storytelling
According to the game concept the course of the story shall depend on all
players. In this subsection I will show how this condition shall be reached.
The aspect of story interactivity brought up a problem which I investigated
in the problem analysis (sec. 3.1). Therein I developed two approaches of which I
will draw on solution 1b (see 24) to solve it: to ensure the dramatic art of an
interactive story whose development bases on more than one player, the fixed and
predefined plot graph consists of larger sections of non-linearity that are
interrupted by short linear points (see A in Figure 2-6 or section 2.2 for detailed
information). I have decided against solution 1a (an entirely non-linear plot
structure) for the following reasons: on the one hand 1b is technically less
complex in the realisation since fewer alternatives need to be provided, and it
allows ensuring a dramatic and sensible story easier since for example no multiple
parallel conflicts have to be generated that all suit the story. On the other hand the
players would not be able to notice the difference between an entirely non-linear
plot and a partly linear plot if they play the game only once since they then run
28
through the plot graph only once. Therefore a completely non-linear plot increases
only the re-playability but not the gaming fun; to allow answering the questions of
my research work, re-playability is irrelevant.
How does solution 1b look like realised in the game concept now? Between
the well-defined exposition and denouement of the plot the players shall
continuously be allowed to choose from a number of different actions that also
result in different consequences on the development of the story. These “strong
narrative” consequences shape a player-dependent story. These consequences are
not made up by the game designer – they result logically from the triggering
action. This principle can be compared with a ship that is send from A to B: the
game designer would be the sender and the players the crew of the ship that
decides on its course within certain borders. The mapping of the dramatic
structure ensures that this course will always be dramatic.
The purpose of the dramatic art is to make the story suspenseful. Thereby I
must consider a certain matter: a good story needs to provide a strong premise and
to make a clear statement. This holds for this game concept as well (with the
difference that the players unfold the story). Therefore I need to set up a fictional
universe, choose the player characters and NPCs, and fit local variations in the
background story which creates the required plot alternatives. These variations
continuously provide the players with riddles that are to be solved and conflicts
that are to be overcome in order to advance. How can I provide the players with
the premise? The premise should be presented to the players before they start
playing, thus during the exposition. Here the first of Ernest Adams‟ “three
problems of interactive storytellers” comes up [Adams99b]. “The problem of
amnesia” says that the player knows less about the environment his character is in
than he would in reality in case he would actually be the character. This problem
can be reduced by providing the players with the following information: who are
the characters they will control (personality, social background, physique), what
do they want and why, what do they fear, which abilities do they have, and which
obstacles hold them up with which consequences. Thus the characters must be
introduced to the players very well but in this new concept the players shall not be
given this information about all of the characters. In order to avoid a
misunderstanding the players shall know what all characters want and what
hinders them since this is part of the common aim to strive for. The remaining
specified character information shall however only be available to the respective
player. This design decision shall on the one hand make a contribution to the
social level of the game concept by stimulating the first communication between
the players who will wish to exchange their personal knowledge about their
characters. On the other hand it shall increase the suspense since in a conflict
situation it is not immediately clear whose character is suited best for coping with
it – this needs to be discussed by the players. Additionally it makes the players
identify themselves only with their own characters and not with the other players‟
characters, and intensifies the relationship between the players and their
characters. This realistically restricted knowledge is thus a very important element
of the concept!
Incidentally, the mentioned common aim can also be to achieve the single,
personal aim of each character, that is, the characters‟ aims to not have to be the
same as long as the single aims can only be achieved with the aid of the other
29
players. Of course this connection needs to be narrative-coherent. Additionally
this principle supports the statement of the game: namely that working together is
more successful and makes the weak stronger as if they were on their own.
At last I will come back to the essential part of the new contribution and
explain its realisation in the game concept in detail. The very new is that the
players shall commonly decide on what to let their characters do from the
beginning to the end of the game. For this purpose the player characters are
continuously being confronted with conflicts that restrain the characters from
achieving their intended aim. To maintain the gaming motivation of the players
they will be given subgoals and subtasks. To make these “stages” suspenseful
they shall be designed in a way that each of them follows a small dramatic arc,
that is, a conflict shall be introduced, raised and resolved (see Figure 3-3). The
introduction acquaints the players with the problem that they must overcome, the
raise increases the pressure on the players by for example sharpening the problem,
and the resolution rewards the players for making the right decision by for
example showing a cutscene that the players can enjoy without the need of any
interaction. An additional time limit for solving certain problems (for example,
running away from an attacker) works well to increase the suspense of the
situation and increases the realism as well as the intended communication
between the players. The mentioned cutscenes are non-interactive parts of the plot
in which the players cannot influence the story but simply relax and enjoy. (Some
of these parts coincide with the dramatic key-points mentioned earlier.)
The common decision making process is being determined by the earlier
mentioned disparities in the abilities and personalities of the played characters. To
realise these disparities in the game the player characters are being provided with
personal items and actions (Adventure-alike). The items depend on the character
(like the magic wand of a wizard or the glasses of a professor), the actions on their
attributes (´Run away´ for a fearful character or ´Joke´ for a funny character).
Similar to MMORPGs the abilities of the characters (thus the available actions
and items) shall advance during the story (but not elaborately).
The application of an item or action entails a consequence on the developing
story. Thereby their usage can result in the same (logical) consequence that allow
the player to solve the present problem the way he prefers to. Thus this variety is
not story-relevant but increases the freedom of action of the players – and more
options means more reason for (the intended) discussions. Yet the number of
logical solution alternatives concerning the problem that the characters/ players
currently face should be rather small in order not to overstrain the players.
According to Lajos Egri there should even be only one possible way out [Egri46].
This hard limit is not needed for smaller, narrative-insignificant problems but
rather for large conflicts of greater importance. The latter will only occur at noninteractive points of the story to steer the character into a conflict that the players
would try to avoid if they could.
30
Figure 3-3
Dramatic art of the single stages of the plot
Each stage contains a small exposition, climax and resolution itself.
From the distinctiveness of each character follows that, depending on the
situation, one of the characters is better or best suited to solve the present problem
than the others. Yet it shall also happen that the situation requires the intervention
of all characters. This means the game designer needs to pay attention to the
balance of the character (player) involvement. Optimal is a ratio of many conflicts
involving all characters (also in form of one after another) to few single-character
tasks that should challenge each player approx. equally often. The players thus
have to find out which character is the best choice at which time and in which
way, and also consider the respective consequences. And since they do not know
the items or actions of the other player characters they are “forced” to exchange
their personal knowledge and discuss what they will let their characters do.
To prepare the players to the required common decision making and
cooperation their first task shall take place right at the beginning of the game: they
are challenged to discuss the distribution of the roles. This shall happen after the
introduction in order to introduce each player to all characters. Therefore they are
enabled to judge which character they want and to justify their character
preference. To not benefit egoistic or reckless players this task can only be made
with the consent of all players – thus cooperation is in this case enforced and not
encouraged as later in the game.
3.2.4 Realisation of the Cooperative Gaming Principle
In this subsection shall be described how cooperative gaming behaviour
shall be promoted. This matter is the second problem I examined in the problem
analysis (sec. 3.1) and for which I developed three approaches. For solving the
second problem I decided to apply all of them: 2a, 2b and 2c (see p. 25) since all
three have the ability to encourage cooperative acting of the players, and in
contrary to 1a and 1b they do not exclude each other but can even be merged.
How can they be realised in the concept?
In detail, solution 2a includes that the aim of the game on the one hand is
the same for all players/ characters (a certain story event) and on the other hand
that the players can only successfully achieve it commonly. (Such an aim could for
31
example appear as the common desire of the characters to return home.) In order
to achieve this cooperative acting it is thus important to communicate this
condition to the players. This can be combined very well with the introduction of
the players to their characters at the beginning of the game. That is, if a player
prefers to be inactive or “ignorant” concerning the other players, not only the aim
does not come closer but already the current game scene cannot be finished - or
such a gaming behaviour has consequences in regard to the aim. Since the players
of course intend to achieve the aim they are expected to do what is needed to
succeed, thus cooperative acting as well if it is conducive.
The latter immediately represents an intersection with solution 2b: the
assignment of egoistic and antagonistic actions (that should be provided in a
believable narrative game) to negative consequences on the co-players or the
succeeding, and cooperative actions to positive aftermaths. Such a negative
consequence could for example be the insuring or even the death of one of the
other characters. A further option is the aggravation of the common current
situation of the characters, that is, the conflict the characters are confronted with
becomes suddenly more difficult to solve than before. Hence a positive
consequence would be the shortening, ease or resolution of a conflict, depending
on the effectiveness of the respective action, as well as the rescue of another
character being in danger. If the own behaviour affects others (e.g. co-players)
they will naturally react to the causer. This feedback will in turn result in an
influence on the behaviour of the causer – sometimes immediately, sometimes
only later. Thus cooperation is expected to be motivated. (Senseless actions
should result in no consequences on co-players or story in order to emphasize
positive and negative actions.)
This solution 2b in turn intersects with the third and last solution, 2c, since
2c envisions the punishing of antagonistic or egoistic actions and the rewarding of
cooperative behaviour respectively. The punishing can appear as increase in the
distance of the players to their aim, that is, they are thrown back in the plot or into
another plot strand which is noticeably more difficult to overcome. If, for
example, the plot is a journey from A to B, with A being the exposition and B the
aim, their distance to the aim can be visualised with the aid of a map on which the
characters move forward. If not, then a NPC could bring the happened regression
to the players‟ minds. Another punishment can even be the death of the own
character but only if the behaviour of the players has been extremely damaging.
The death must then result in game over since as per solution 1b all characters are
needed for playing and achieving the common aim. The failed game scene can
hereupon start again; the players will reconsider the made, wrong decisions and
discuss alternatives and act differently than before. The indeed extreme
consequence of the death of player characters I do not want to exclude since I
regard it as being very important for the conclusiveness and “senseness” of the
plot – if the player risks the neck of his character he must face the logical
aftermath, and dead ends are a logical element in an action system.
In order to make solutions 2b (consequences) and 2c (punishing/ rewarding)
work the following is important to be considered by the game designer: of all
available actions the consequences must be communicated to the players, in fact
negative consequences stronger than positive ones. Especially peril to the life of a
character must be foreshadowed – a death must not seem to appear from nowhere.
If not doing so the unfolding story would not be coherent with the result of
32
frustrating the players. Cause and effect need to have a direct and obvious
connection in the game play. A suitable and smart realisation of such
adumbrations which fits in the game play very well is to let the player characters
think loudly. Also NPCs could warn or make recommendations.
Hereby the chosen problem solutions have been clarified, justified and
discussed. What attracts attention is that the strategies for solving the cooperation
problem fortunately serve also another purpose: they increase the interactivity of
the story. The diverse consequences directly affect the story course, and which
consequence takes place is dependent on the players.
The new principle of common decision finding and making in an interactive
drama brings the following problem along that needs to be considered: what is
going to happen if the players cannot come to an agreement? In game scenes with
a time limit they are not given enough time to discuss endlessly but in the other
scenes they might start to argue or abandon their so far cooperative behaviour.
Voting could represent a possible solution but I consider a casting of votes as very
harmful to the narrative flow and therefore as not a satisfying solution. A better
alternative is the integration of a “game guide”. This guide should not only be
visible to players but also take over a role in the story as a NPC that is interactive
or non-interactive. To fit him in the story he could be utilised as the donor
(prepares the hero or gives the hero some magical object) or the helper (helps the
hero in the quest) – two of the eight character types according to Vladimir L.
Propp [Propp28]). In doing so the story spreads over the whole gameplay keeping
the players in the gaming flow. The guide can warn the players, give them advice,
praise or reproach them, and make sure the players come to an agreement in a
timely manner. Thereby he could appear interactively, i.e., on the wish of the
players, or non-interactively, i.e. depending on certain occurring story events.
Also a mix of both represents a useful realisation – very important advice could be
automatically provided and less urgent one on demand of the players.
Since he appears as participator of the game the players are likely to listen
to him. Thus such a game guide functions as a kind of repair strategy.
3.2.5 Summarisation
Therewith, one realisation of the aspects of the new game concept has been
explained. Finally I want to summarise the new game concept in short in the
following points:
1. The freedom of the players consists in jointly deciding on who shall do what
when and how. For this purpose they are supposed to consult with each other
on the present problem situation their characters are confronted with. Their
decisions are dependent on the varying attributes of their characters.
2. The players are being lead by the story universe which provides the attributes
of their characters (and the game guide), setting the motivation and the aims.
The game designer maps these story mechanisms to the mechanisms of the
game.
33
3.3 Evaluation Criteria
3. The dramatic level of the game bases on a for the most part interactive story
of which the course follows the dramatic arc. This course is dependent on the
actions of approx. two to six players in the game. After reaching the dramatic
climax of the story the plot is being resolved in one or more (few) endings.
4. The social level consists in encouraging of cooperative gaming behaviour and
on the continuous stimulation of communication between the players. The
most effective element concerning cooperation is to provide the player
characters (and therewith the players) with a common aim.
5. The game starts with presenting the characters (attributes and aims) together
with the introduction into the story (creating a premise), followed by the
selection of the distribution of roles and a private introduction of the players
with their respective, own character. Afterwards the game itself begins and
consists of a sequence of game scenes that confront the characters with riddles
and conflicts. The game scenes are respectively interrupted by non-interactive
resting points.
3.3
Evaluation Criteria
In the following I will establish criteria that shall enable me to evaluate the
usefulness and quality of the results of the case study that I will carry out later.
These criteria will also allow examining if the problems that were raised by the
new game concept (which I analysed in section 3.1) could be solved successfully
by the developed and chosen strategies. Furthermore they will help me with the
critical evaluation of the aims that I set in section 1.2.
C1) Interactive storytelling
The players perceive the story as result of their actions and decisions: the
story would have taken a different course if they had decided different at
certain points in the game scene.
C2) Game suspense
All players perceive the gaming as suspenseful: no player is bored or not
keen on going on with playing.
C3) Cooperation
The players cooperate while playing: they discuss possible conflict solutions
and make decisions together.
C4) Amnesia
The “amnesia” of the players shall be as small as possible: they know the
characters they play concerning their attributes, abilities, worries/ fears,
background and current environment and act respectively.
34
C5) Coherence
The implemented part of the story is consistent: if the players look back at
the played scene the containing actions and the resulting consequences
make sense.
C6) Preparation
The players are ready for the climax to take place: the players are being well
prepared along the development of the story for it.
C7) Gaming fun
The players had fun while playing the game: they like story and enjoyed
playing it.
C8) Leadership-freedom ratio
The players perceive the ratio of leadership and freedom as well-balanced:
they do not feel lost, overstrained, unchallenged or too restricted.
C9) Problem understanding
The players understand the small conflicts their characters are confronted
with: the decisions they make are motivated by sensible reasons.
Why do the defined criteria have significance, that is, what makes them
meaningful for an utilisable, problem-based evaluation? All of them are
significant since they are derived either from the conducted problem analysis (C1C3), newly discovered threats (C4 – C6) or the game concept itself (C7-C9).
However, these criteria are not measurable and cannot be converted into
measurable criteria as well; they can only checked and judged be by estimation.
The now present criteria will be drawn on in the intended case study to
observe the players while playing and to interview them after playing.
35
Chapter 4: Exemplary Implementation
CHAPTER 4:
4. Exemplary Implementation
The fourth chapter will contain one implementation of the new game concept
portrayed in chapter 3. Firstly a complete requirements analysis clarifies the
demands of the concept on a sufficient implementation; afterwards the
architecture of the implementation is presented and at last detailed information
about the implementation itself given.
4.1
Requirements Analysis
The following requirements analysis shall help to determine the demands of
the developed game concept (sec. 3.2) on an adequate realisation. On the basis of
the Software Requirements Specification22 I will distinguish between customer
requirements, being demands from the perspective of the customer (the game
concept itself) and the end users (players) of the software (game), and
development requirements, representing the demands from the technical
perspective of the software developer (me). It will be used to derive specific
assumptions that allow making diverse decisions concerning what needs to be
implemented obligatory and what optionally.
An important aspect of the implementation is its dependency on the
intended case study. To be able to judge the new game concept a test with real
users is required. This test demands an extensive specialisation of the technical
implementation of the game concept. The most decisive factor is the setting of a
story since it determines the number of players (which equals the number of main
characters according to the game concept) and the target audience. The story
chosen for the case study requires four players being children around the age of
ten. (The reasons for the chosen story will be explained in section 5.1.)
22
The SRS is a standard for specifying software which has been introduced by the IEEE (Institute
of Electrical and Electronics Engineers).
37
4.1 Requirements Analysis
4.1.1 General Description
In the following I will describe the game software resulting from the
developed game concept, taking the influences of the case study into account.
1)
Software functions
a.) The game shall be playable by four players, each using an own computer,
screen, mouse and headset. This results from the choice of having the
players in different locations (setting C, cf. 3.2.1).
b.) The game software shall connect the players‟ computers via internet. This
also results from setting C (see above).
c.) The game shall be controlled similar to classical point-and-click
Adventures. Due to the narrative gaming principle this kind of control
was chosen (cf. 3.2.3).
d.) The handling of the game shall be simple and intuitive, i.e. suitable for
children. This derives from the chosen kind of story being a fairy tale.
e.) The game shall provide a telephone conference between the players. This
also results from setting C (see above).
2)
End user attributes (participants of case study)
a.) The players are children around the age of ten.
b.) The players have experience in and enjoy playing computer games,
preferably Adventures.
3)
Restrictions for the software developer
Since the game is part of a master‟s research project the development time
and human resources are very limited. Hence, the following assumptions and
dependencies (non-realisable aspects which are not essential for the case
study) emerge.
a.) Elaborate graphical features such as high quality images, animations,
mouse over etc. are not needed for the implementation.
b.) Sound (background music, voices or sound effects) is not essential for a
demonstration of the new game concept. Music just creates sentiments;
sound effects ease the user interaction with the game - contrary to
character voices both are negligible since only the immersion is
weakened. The voices will be compensated by text.
c.) Savegames are irrelevant for demonstrating the new game concept and
are additionally available as standards; they therefore will be left out in
the implementation.
d.) The possibility of adjusting the game (e.g. volume, resolution, text speed
etc.) is irrelevant for demonstrating the new game concept and will not be
considered in the exemplary implementation.
e.) The required telephone conference does not have to be contained within
the implementation but can be realised with the aid of freeware VoIP
software (e.g. Skype23).
23
http://www.skype.com/ © 2007 Skype Limited
38
f.) Since implementing the entire game is not required for an exemplarily
demonstration of the game concept only the beginning of the game and
one sample scene will be implemented.
4.1.2 Specified Requirements
Next I will define the specific software requirements by considering the
needed software functions taking into account the restrictions, assumptions and
dependencies.
4)
Functional requirements
a.) Game engine (for in- and output, etc.)
b.) Network communication
5)
Non-functional requirements
a.) Must run in real-time
b.) GUI similar to classical Adventures
It can be concluded that no technical innovations need to be developed.
According to 1) and 2) the game can be implemented by exclusively using
existing technologies and algorithms.
The now present specified requirements form the basis for the following
software architecture.
4.2
Software Architecture
In this section I will describe the basic components and their interaction
within the game software system. I will begin with the description of the
implementation-specific decisions that have been made, and proceed with the
description of the game software architecture.
To realise the developed game concept the first decision that had to be made
concerns the type of graphics: two-dimensional or three-dimensional (in the
following abbreviated by 2D and 3D respectively). For this decision affects many
areas of the game, such as input, resources and others. I decided to implement the
game with 2D graphics for three reasons that derive from the requirements: on the
one hand 2D graphics are mostly faster and simpler to implement which was
necessary due to the limited amount of time. On the other hand I wanted to stay
with the classical Adventure tradition.
39
4.2 Software Architecture
GE components
Basic functionalities
Graphics engine (2D)
Sound engine
Physics engine
AI
Savegames
Control (Mouse)
Network (4 players)
Scripting
Realisation in the game
All realised with Pygame (platform-dependent
functionalities, e.g. loading of images, creating
window etc.)
Displaying of images with Pygame
Not contained
Not contained
Not contained
Not contained
Processing of mouse inputs with Pygame
Own system using Python’s socket API
Game logic also implemented in Python
Table 4-1
Used components of the game engine
The next decision that had to be made was which programming language to
use. My choice was the dynamic, high-level programming language Python24
since it is simple, clear and supports the rapid development of applications. For
basic game functionality the multimedia framework Pygame25 was selected. It
consists of a set of python modules written on top of the SDL26 library and is
designed for writing games.
However, Pygame represents no complete game engine but provides only
basic multimedia functionality. The game logic of an Adventure game had to be
implemented from scratch. Furthermore it does not contain modules for
multiplayer games. Therefore a simple network component was written for the
game in consideration of the specified requirements. (cf. Table 4-1)
Concerning the network component a decision had to be made if realising it
as client-server system or via peer-to-peer (cf. Figure 4-1). Since the latter is more
difficult to implement and almost never used in existing multiplayer games a
client-server based communication system has been implemented. Thereby the
server is an extra programme which can run on one of the client computers or on a
remote computer. Figure 4-2 shows a rough overview of this system which works
as follows. The server programme handles all the game logic which modifies the
state of the game based on certain events (e.g. player actions and timers).
Whenever game state changes occur the server updates all clients with the new
information. The clients in turn interpret the game state and visualise it to the
players. Every time a player executes an action via his mouse (e.g. let his
character walk somewhere) this action is sent to the server that processes it
according to the game logic and afterwards updates the clients again.
24
Official website of Python: http://python.org/; © 1990-2007, Python Software Foundation
Official website of Pygame: http://pygame.org/
26
Simple DirectMedia Layer is a multimedia library designed to provide low level access to audio,
input devices and 2D video framebuffer. http://www.libsdl.org/
25
40
Figure 4-1
A schematic representation of a server based network (A) and a
peer-to-peer (P2P) based network
Figure 4-2
Schematic diagram of the software architecture
Purple: Clients notify server of player actions; Brown: Output to screen;
Green: Server sends game state messages to clients; Blue: Mouse input
Concluding, I will go into the server- and client programmes in more detail.
Instead of showing the class hierarchy in a diagram the general programme flow
is being shown in Figure 4-3 on the next page; the latter provides a more
expressive overview of the programme structure. The following classes are part of
the server programme:


The class client represents a physical client and abstracts its low level
network communication with the client.
The class gamestate is the base class for seven classes that implement the
respective game logic for seven specific parts of the game (e.g. character
selection or the single gaming scene itself). Each of these communicates
with the corresponding game screen class on the client.
41
4.2 Software Architecture
I will proceed with explaining the client in more detail. A general overview
of the programme flow is provided in Figure 4-3.




The class gamestate corresponds with the respective class in the server (see
above) and implements the according game part on the client. It manages
player input and the output to the screens.
The class object represents the objects in the game with which the players
(and their characters respectively) can interact. It is responsible for
displaying the objects and collision detection.
The class character is assigned to each player character and manages the
displaying of the animations of the characters (walking) and collision
detection. Additionally, it has a sub class for the character which is being
played on that particular client, managing his items and actions.
The very similar classes item and action represent the items from the
character‟s inventory and respectively the actions from the character‟s
“actiontory”. The displaying is managed and items/ actions are connected
with an action execution (more details on that in the next section).
The general structure of the system has been fully described now.
Additionally the structure of the client- and server programmes has been outlined.
How does the exemplary implementation that is case study adjusted look like in
detail then?
Figure 4-3
Flow diagram of the server- and client programme respectively
42
4.3
Implementation Details
In the last section of the implementation chapter I will portray the graphical
user interface (GUI) of the game screen and the realisation of the player actions
that determine the course of the plot. The implementation details will be focussed
on the developed game concept. Thus typical, usual game implementation
elements that are not concept specific shall be neglected since they are of no
relevance for this research project. Also, according to the requirements analysis
the new game concept did not demand technical innovations, therefore this
chapter will not contain new algorithms or the like.
4.3.1 GUI of the Game Screen
I decided to let the GUI of the game scene base on classical point-and-click
Adventures since it represents a proven concept, and extend it by new elements
which are required from the game concept. Also, it is divided in one large gaming
area and two smaller head-up displays (HUDs). Figure 4-4 shows a schematic
representation of the GUI containing letters that mark specific areas in it. Some
GUI elements are the same on each, and some are not. In the following the
contained elements shall be depicted in consideration of their dependency of the
respective client.

A: the gaming area
The gaming area taking up the largest part of the GUI displays the characters,
their environment wherein the can walk around, and objects the characters can
interact with. It looks the same on each client.

B: the character information
This area contains four images of different sizes showing the player
characters. It is client dependent, that is, the large image displays the
respective player character, reminding the player of his character choice. The
other three images are of same size and smaller, and represent the co-players‟
characters. The images are interactive; via mouse click the player is given
information about the characters. In fact, the private detailed information
Figure 4-4
The schematic GUI of the game scene
The game window (800x600 px) is
divided in three parts: one large gaming
area (in white) between two small HUD
areas (in grey).
43
4.3 Implementation Details
about his character, and the rough information that the story introduction
provided about the other main characters.

C: the timer
If the game is in a situation that has a time limit in this area a clock will be
displayed which indicates the expiring time. This part is the same on each
client. (This area could alternatively display the health of a live-threatened
character; in this case it would have to be client dependent.)

D: the menu
The menu usually provides access to the game exit, settings etc. but will not
be available in the exemplary implementation since it is not needed for the
case study.

E: the inventory access
The access to the inventory of each player is represented by a backpack image.
This backpack can take up two states: closed or open. This state depends on
the actions of the respective player; therefore the inventory element is client
specific.

F: the action/ item area
This larger area in the lower HUD can display two types of icons: the content
of the inventory or action icons. The current type of icons depends on if the
backpack (E) is opened (show inventory icons) or closed (show “actiontory”
icons). Since the items as well as the actions are character dependent this area
of the GUI is client specific.

G: the game guide
Whenever the game guide being a new element from the game concept
advises the characters/ players (which depends on the plot) he is visualised in
the lower HUD. This element is not player dependent and therefore the same
on each of the four clients.
Another typical element of graphical user interfaces in game represents the
game progression. I decided not to include it in the GUI but provide an own game
screen for it. The progression of the players in the game is visualised by a (2D)
map showing the world wherein the story takes place. It provides the players with
the information about where there characters currently are, about already visited
places in it and about the upcoming game scene. This screen will be displayed
respectively before and after a game scene (of which there will be only one
implemented).
However, I presented only one (and just mentioned another one) of the
seven game screens that will be contained in the case study sample game. Some of
them are non-interactive and some require the interaction of the players. Also,
some are client specific whereas the others provide the same content for all
clients. Their description would be too extensive and is furthermore being
illustrated in the description of the course of the game in the upcoming chapter
about the case study (see sec. 5.1.).
In the upcoming section I will go deeper into part F since it represents a
special part of the developed game concept.
44
4.3.2 Player Actions
To take up the earlier mentioned element F of the game screen GUI I will
explain how the actions of the players are being realised. According to the game
concept, during the game scene a number of alternative actions are available to
each player. These are partly purposeful, partly neutral and partly damaging (cf.
3.2.4). After each action execution the corresponding consequence is displayed to
all players.
As already mentioned I decided to stay with the traditional design of pointand-click Adventures, that is, to realise player actions with icons that the players
can access with the mouse. These are easy to recognise and also easy to handle
(but require a further explanation by text labels). These icons can either be items
from the inventory of the player character or already complete actions themselves.
That means the displayed inventory items are variable just as it is in Adventure
games, but the available “actiontory” actions are contrary to classical Adventure
games variable as well. The latter depend on the current situation in the game
scene. Furthermore both the items and actions differ from character to character
and are not visible to the player at the same time (area F in Figure 4-4). Figure 0-9
and Figure 0-10 on page 85 in the appendix show how this was realised for the
case study. (For an example of a classical Adventure GUI see Figure 0-1 on page
82 in the appendix.)
To let his character interact with his environment (including other characters
and objects) he can pick an item from his character‟s inventory or an action from
his character‟s “actiontory” and combine in with the game world. This picking is
only visible to the executing player. However, these combination either result in
nothing if the combination is senseless concerning the current situation the
characters are confronted with or illogical, or in the other case in the displaying of
the action execution. According to the game concept, from this action execution a
consequence on the further course of the story can follow but not necessarily has
to. (see Figure 4-5) With the execution of such an action the player implicitly
determines on which branch of the plot graph the unfolding story continues (until
all alternative branching come together again in the defined key points).
In both cases the action execution and its corresponding consequence must
be communicated to all players. Theoretically this can be realised by means of
different visualisations, for example as animation in the game world. I decided
Figure 4-5
Results of the combination of
the inventory or “actiontory”
with the game world
Left: inventory/ “actiontory”
Middle: game world
Right: results
45
4.3 Implementation Details
against animations according to requirements analysis and developed an own
alternative: an image is displayed in the middle of the gaming area which contains
a graphic that shows the executing character and a text that explains the action
execution as well as the following consequence or its absence. This method
ensures that no player can miss an action execution and its especially important
consequence. Furthermore it suits the fairy tale character of the game. Figure 0-9
and Figure 0-10 on page 85 in the appendix show corresponding screenshots of
the game.
From this implementation decision the following problem evolves: if more
than one player at a time executes an action the images displayed in the middle of
the gaming area will overlap. To make sure that all action executions and
corresponding consequences are seen by the players the players‟ input is being
blocked for the duration of their displaying (and visualised with the mouse
cursor). Therefore no player is able to act and his eyes are being focussed on the
action execution image with its information.
The evolving large amount of possible combinations and corresponding
consequences form a system of rules representing the largest part of the gameplay.
(This system is implemented in the server programme, see sec. 4.2.) In particular,
one rule consists of the combination item or action with the game world and the
corresponding consequence. These rules transfer the game state from one
condition into the next; each rule can occur only once but does not necessarily
have to, and is not reversible. Finally, the availability of a rule depends on the
previously executed rules (complying with the branching plot graph of the game
concept).
The general course of the game (the sequence of game screens) has yet not
been described. This will happen in conjunction with the design of the game
within the following case study.
46
Chapter 5: Case Study
CHAPTER 5:
5. Case Study
Chapter 5 serves the purpose of describing the design and execution of a suitable
experiment as well as the discussion of its results with regard to the criteria
defined in section 3.3.
5.1
Design of Sample Game
In this section I will portray the game that has been implemented for the
case study. This study shall not serve the purpose of testing the game software but
allow a critical evaluation of the new game concept and the answering of the
questions that I brought up in the section Motivation (1.1): Does the new gaming
principle provide large fun-to-play, and does it work at all? Based on the
requirements analysis (sec. 4.1) the game will only consist of the introduction of
the game and one sample game scene. Also parts of the implementation that are
(according to the analysis) irrelevant for the mentioned purposes are being
neglected.
I will begin with a short description of the story that I have chosen for the
case study. My choice was The Wizard of Oz according to the Russian author
Alexander M. Wolkow27. This fairy tale-like story can be classified as a
“Monomyth28”: a popular classical narrative pattern that represents the journey of
a hero in twelve stations (for more information on Monomyth see Figure 0-2 on
page 82 in the appendix). In The Wizard of Oz one of the four main characters is
being transferred from its familiar world into a strange world. To get back into the
familiar world this character has to help fulfil the wishes of the three other main
characters. For this purpose they need to conjointly undertake a dangerous journey
full of obstacles to a strange place.
I decided to use this already existing story instead of creating a new one for
the following reasons: the story is famous in a degree that it is likely that the
players are familiar with it; this circumstance simplifies the introduction of the
players to it. Furthermore the contained number of main characters is very
27
This version of the story has first been published in 1938 in Russia and bases on The Wonderful
Wizard of Oz (see [Wolkow82]), written by the American author L. Frank Baum in 1900.
28
For more information on Monomyth or Hero's Journey see [Campbell48] or [Vogler02].
47
5.1 Design of Sample Game
suitable for a case study: two would not be enough due to the small
expressiveness and six too much since it makes the implementation very complex.
Also it offers a large number of “sub-Adventures” of which I could pick one that I
consider as being especially suitable concerning the balance of the player
involvement, and “sub goals” to establish the intended small dramatic arcs (see
game concept, sec. 3.2). Additionally its monomyth nature allows defining a core
story and therefore creating the required plot alternatives. But the probably most
decisive argument for its application is the circumstance that due to its premise all
characters need each other to achieve their aims (see sec. 3.2.3) – representing a
part of my concept: one of the solution strategies to encourage cooperative
gaming. The cooperative nature of the game is thereby mirrored in the statement
of the story: that working together is more fun and more successful. Last but not
least the story is not of the complicated type, thus easier to play.
As explained in the description of the concept the characters have special
attributes. With the aid of the characterisation as per L. Egri (physique, social
status and psychology – see [Egri46]) I have differentiated the main characters by
the means of the categories in Table 5-1. Each player is given control about one of
the four characters. According to the concept only the premise (back histories and
aims) of all characters is communicated to each player; more detailed information
(attributes, fears, abilities, etc.) are only being presented to the respective players.
These aims provide the players with a strong motivation.
Another advantage of the story is the existence of a minor character that is
extraordinary suitable to take the part of the game guide (I explained its
usefulness at the end of the concept description, sec. 3.2). This minor character is
the dog of Dorothy which always accompanies the main characters. Due to his
neutrality and rather little relevance for the core story he can warn the players,
give them advice, praise or reproach them, and make sure they come to an
agreement. He should appear already at an early stage before the game itself starts
– in the present case he will ask the players to distribute the roles and introduce
them to their characters.
Due to its fairy tale nature the chosen story is more suitable to be played by
children (at the age of about ten years) than by adults. Thus the case study will be
Dorothy
Aim
Attributes
Traits
Fears
Abilities
The Scarecrow
The Tin
The Cowardly
Woodman
Lion
coming home
get a brain
get a heart
get courage
(for thinking)
(for feeling)
(for ruling)
lovingly,
clever (!),
sensitive,
lovingly,
merry, modest inquiring, clumsy lovingly (!) strong, brave (!)
is small, has
is made of straw, is made of
is large
magic shoes has walking stick tin, has axe
not coming
water, fire
water
water, fire, big
home
animals
Conversing,
thinking, shoo
chuck wood,
jumping,
making friends
away birds
carving
roaring
Table 5-1
The classification of the main characters
48
executed with four children as the players. The opportunity arises to introduce the
young players into the story with the aid of a classical storyteller, yet only in form
of his voice. The introductory story shall also be visualised in a picture book like
style, that is, text together with pictures as a sequence of images. The storyteller
and the story book style both increase the immersion into the game world and
enthral the children more intensive.
Another opportunity arises from the story containing a long journey: the
integration of a map that reveals the location of their characters in the story world
and their distance to places they want to reach. Additionally the map can provide
information about places the characters have visited before. Such a map creates an
image of the story world in the minds of the players giving them the satisfying
feeling of knowing how to find their way in the story world.
Now that the decision of choosing a suspenseful story as well as the chosen
story itself have been justified I will give an insight into the order of events of the
sample game that has been implemented for the case study.
Part 1) Start screen
The game can be started as soon as the required numbers of players (four
due to the number of main characters) is connected to the server.
Part 2) Introduction screen (non-interactive)
The four main characters are introduced to the players; the players get to
know the characters‟ back history and their aims creating a premise and
the motivation of the players. (see Figure 5-1, next page)
Part 3) Role distribution screen
The players are asked to choose one of the characters introduced by the
game guide who appears at this point of the game the first time. (see
Figure 5-2, next page)
Part 4) Character description screen (non-interactive)
To each player is presented an individual screen wherein the game guide
tells him the specific, private attributes (see Table 5-1) of the received
character. (see Figure 5-3, p. 51)
Part 5) Map screen (non-interactive)
The players get to know the location of their characters in the visualised
game world. Afterwards they are given an introduction in the new
situation their characters are confronted with. (see Figure 5-4, p. 51)
Part 6) Game scene
The actual game starts. The game guide gives hints, advises and warns
the players. (see Figure 5-5, p. 52)
Part 7) Cutscene (non-interactive)
The players are shown a resolving cutscene that rewardingly informs
them about their success (or rebukingly failure) and allows them to relax
before their next task. (see Figure 5-6, p. 52)
The sample game ends with part 7. In case the players fail the same game
scene starts again until they succeed. (In a complete version of the game part 6
and 7 would continuously repeat until the end of the game.)
49
5.1 Design of Sample Game
Now that I clarified the design of the sample game with regard to its story,
characters and course I will proceed with the execution of the case study for
which the sample game has been developed. Herein the actual game scene will be
described.
(Annotations:
The language in the game had to be German since the players will be German
children. Furthermore a large part of the graphics in the game are illustrations
from the Wizard of Oz book [Wolkow82] that I have revised.)
Figure 5-1
Introduction screen
(part 2)
The players are being
introduced to the back
history and the four main
characters (premise and
aims are being
established).
50
Figure 5-2
Role distribution
screen
(part 3)
Two players have
selected the same
character. The game
guide tells them that they
need to come to an
agreement in order to let
the game start.
Figure 5-3
Character description
screen
(part 4)
Each player is being
provided by the game
guide with private
information about the
attributes of his
character.
Figure 5-4
Map screen
(part 5)
The players are given the
information about where
their characters currently
are located in the story
world.
51
5.2 Execution of Case Study
Figure 5-5
Game scene (part 6)
The graphic shows the
initial condition the game
scene.
Figure 5-6
Cutscene screen
(part 7)
After the
accomplishment of the
game scene the players
are rewarded with a
cutscene.
5.2
Execution of Case Study
In the following I will describe the setup and the execution of the
experiment, followed by presentation of the results.
52
Figure 5-7
Schematic diagram of the setup in top view
The players (green) sit back to back so they
cannot see one another. Their observers (blue)
are located at their left side providing a view
on the screen as well as on the player‟s face.
5.2.1 Setup
The case study took place in one room wherein all four children sit behind
their own computer which contradicts the setting chosen for the concept wherein
the players are located in different rooms (cf. 3.2.1); the case study could not be
executed in four different rooms due to technical reasons.
To nonetheless simulate the privacy of each player to some degree these
were located crosswise and back to back. Due to this change the use of the
designated headsets became redundant. An observing assistant with a form was
positioned next to each player. Figure 5-8 provides an impression of the setup.
The players, boys of an age between eight and thirteen years, communicated by
talking to each other.
The assistants‟ form contained on the one hand advice for making
observation notes and on the other hand a number of questions the assistants had
to ask the players after the playing. The evaluation criteria defined in section 3.3
have been drawn on for the observation- and interview questions. Both are listed
in Table 5-2 and Table 5-2 and Table 5-3 on page 55. The observations based on
facial expressions, gestures and gaming behaviour of the players. The
distinguishing between observing and interviewing was required since the
evaluation criteria cannot all be checked by only one of the methods. Furthermore
the observations by the assistants should be used to check if the body language
and the behaviour of the players correspond with answers they give.
Next I want to give a rough description of the tasks the players have to
master in the game scene since this is the focus of the experiment. The scenes/
screens before the game scene have already been explained sufficiently in the
previous section. In my description I will follow the dramatic arc that as per
definition in the concept shall underlie each stage of the game. The sample game
scene represents one of those stages and is being introduced to the players in the
second half of the map screen by a zoom in the map and written and spoken
information about the situation (exposition). Then the players are to become
active; the game guide by the name Toto warns Dorothy and the lion of the lifethreatening danger (poisonous poppy field) and gives them the advice to rescue
53
themselves. Also a countdown in form of a clock is started to make the time
dependency of the danger clear (rising moment). (The hints of the Toto are always
perceivable by all players.) If the affected players make the right decision right
away (which will not be easy since it represents the easiest solution demanding
only little communication) Dorothy, the lion or both can be saved, and the conflict
is resolved. If not, Dorothy/ the lion/ both fall asleep; their players cannot interact
anymore. Another hint of Toto increases the suspense to its maximum (climax):
the warning of the players of the death of the respective character/s. It is now task
of the other players to save the characters that have fallen asleep which can only
be mastered if these work together (cooperation). If they fail the conflict ends
dramatically with the death of one or both characters (catastrophe). If they make
the right actions the players are being informed about the upcoming rescue
(falling moment), followed by a happy resolution of the conflict (denouement). In
both cases a cutscene takes over from the game scene giving a short explanation
about the end of the game scene.
The described game scene has been has been chosen over other scenes from
the story since it contains the principles of realising cooperation (an aim, reward/
punishment, etc., cf. 3.2.4).
O1 Gaming fun:
- Do you have the impression that your player enjoys the playing?
- If yes, how much? *
O2 Suspense:
- Do you have the impression your player is captivated by the game?
O3 Cooperation:
- Does your player discuss with the other players?
- Does he make decisions commonly or egoistically?
O4 Problem understanding:
Does the gaming behaviour of your player seem to be rather purposeful
or arbitrary?
O5 Amnesia/ Coherence:
Did your player express confusion (facial expressions or gestures)?
O6 Leadership-freedom ratio/ Challenge:
Did your player express helplessness or panic (facial expressions or
gestures)?
C7
C2
C3
C9
C4/
C5
C8
I1 Interactive storytelling:
- Did you have the feeling of influencing the story?
C1
- Do you think the story would have taken another course if you had
made different decisions while gaming?
I2 Gaming fun:
- Did you enjoy playing?
C7
I3 Suspense:
C2
- Did you perceive the game as suspenseful? How much? *
54
I4
I5
I6
I7
I8
Cooperation:
Did you like to work together or would you prefer to play alone?
Problem understanding:
Did you understand the problems the characters faced?
Amnesia:
Did you have the feeling you did not know enough about the characters,
their aims or the story?
Coherence:
If you look back at the story – do you find it sensible?
Leadership-freedom ratio/ Challenge:
- Did you feel lost or too restricted?
- Did you feel unchallenged or overstrained?
C3
C9
C4
C5
C8
Table 5-2 and Table 5-3 Observation- (O1-O6) and interview questions (I1-I8)
The questions marked with a star (*) shall be answered by using a five-point scale that covers
“very much” to “very little”; all others are yes/no questions (with the option of asking for the
reason). The rightmost column contains the respective underlying evaluation criteria as defined in
section 3.3.
Figure 5-8
Photograph of the setup
The assistant observes the
gaming behaviour of his player.
Figure 5-9
Photograph of the interview
with the players
The player is asked to use the
smile-o-meter.
55
5.2.2 Results
In the following the results of the experiment are presented. These will be
free of any judgement and exclusively mirror the observations of the assistants and
the answer of the players, based on the questionnaire. The evaluation of the results
will happen in the next section. Note: O1, O2, Q2 and Q3 are contrary to all other
questions not answerable with yes or no; the children were asked to categorize
their answer with the help of a “smile-o-meter”29 that contains 5 values: very
much, much, neutral, little, very little. (The smile-o-meter represents a visualised
form of a Likert scale30.) The original questionnaire (yet in German language) is
available in the appendix of this thesis (p. 87). Additionally the game screen of
two players has been recorded providing the opportunity of later examinations of
the players‟ gaming behaviour.
Firstly it needs to be mentioned that due the players sitting back to back to
each other (cf. sec. 5.2.1) they turned around very often so that they could also
look at the other players and their game screen while talking to them.
O1 Observed Gaming fun: *
All assistants replied Yes; 1x very much, 1x much and 2x medium gaming
fun.
O2 Observed Suspense: *
All assistants replied Yes; 1x very much, 1x medium and 2x little suspense.
O3 Observed Cooperation:
All assistants judged the cooperative gaming behaviour as being little and
halting in the beginning, then continuously getting better.
O4 Observed Problem understanding:
Three players showed rather arbitrary gaming behaviour in the beginning,
continuously getting more and more target-aimed later. One player seemed to
behave purely arbitrary due to a lack of understanding of icon symbols.
O5 Observed Amnesia/ Coherence:
All players showed confusion that yet only evolved from problems with the
interface handling.
O6 Observed Leadership-freedom ratio/ Challenge:
No player seemed to be unchallenged or overstrained. No player seemed to
have panicked; two players showed helplessness – in fact, when their
sleeping characters did not allow them to act, and not in general.
Table 5-4 The results of the observation
O1 and O2 (*) were to be estimated by the assistants with the help of a five-point scale.
29
A tool for eliciting children‟s estimations, based on smiley faces. For more information on
“smile-o-meter” (also “smileyometer” or “smileometer”) see [FaSiHo05] or [SiFaHo05].
30
The Likert scale is a scaling method for estimating the personal attitudes of persons (published
by Rensis Likert in 1932).
56
How have the players now mastered this new type of game? Their first
challenge - to commonly decide on the distribution of the roles - happened
unexpectedly fast; hardly any discussions were necessary to come to an
agreement. Rescuing the two endangered characters from death was yet a more
difficult challenge than expected; three tries were necessary to succeed.
Afterwards the game scene was at the request of the children played again with a
different role-distribution that they could complete at the first try. All of them
regretted the shortness of the game; they wished to go on playing (with further
game scenes).
Furthermore, all players listened carefully and were captivated by the
introduction of the story which was read aloud by me. To my surprise none of
them read the private description about their character that could not be read aloud
by me due to their disparity (simultaneously displayed). Unexpectedly the
handling of the game scene turned out to be too complicated so that an unwanted
interference of the assistants was sometimes required.
The results of the observation during playing and the interview afterwards
are summarised in Table 5-4 and Table 5-5.
I1 Enquired Interactive storytelling:
All players declared that they had the feeling to have influenced the course of
the story depending on their actions; 2 of them much, 2 of them a little.
I2 Enquired Gaming fun: *
All players enjoyed the game; all declared much. As reason they cited the
playing together, the communication and the variability.
I3 Enquired Suspense: *
2 players marked much, the other two 2x little. The latter marks were given
by the two oldest children. One declared he did not like to be inactive when
his character was blocked.
I4 Enquired Cooperation:
All players answered the question if they liked the common playing with yes.
They declared that they enjoyed the newness of this aspect of the Adventurelike game, referred to it as “something different” and liked the “togetherfeeling”.
I5 Enquired Problem understanding:
Three players understood the problems their characters were confronted with.
One did not (the youngest). One declared that the hints of the game guide had
been helpful.
I6 Enquired Amnesia:
The questions if the players knew enough about characters, aims and story
yielded 2x Yes, 1x a little and 1x No (the character behaviour had not been
understood).
I7 Enquired Coherence:
Three players referred to the story as being sensible, one as in some degree.
A younger player added “a very good story”, an older added “logically
constructing”.
57
5.3 Evaluation of the Results
I8 Enquired Leadership-freedom ratio/ Challenge:
Two players felt too restricted since their characters were blocked after some
time; the other two players answered No. Three players felt neither
unchallenged nor overstrained; one felt unchallenged (the oldest). One
declared that the help of the game guide was necessary.
Table 5-5 The answers of the interview with the players
I2 and I3 (*) were to be estimated by the assistants with the help of a five-point scale.
After the accomplished portraying of the setup of the case study as well as
its execution and results I will now proceed with evaluating the results in special
and the case study in general.
5.3
Evaluation of the Results
In the last section of chapter 5 I will begin with the evaluation of the results
of the accomplished test of the game with regard to the criteria I defined in section
3.3. Afterwards I will discuss the results of the evaluation and the execution of the
experiment itself.
5.3.1 Evaluation of the Results according to Criteria
I will evaluate the criteria of section 3.3 in order of their relevance for the
present research project and begin with the least relevant ones.
C4) Amnesia
The criterion to keep the amnesia of the players as small as possible has
been fulfilled only partly. Responsible for the lack of knowledge is the
occurred ignoring of the private descriptions about the personal characters
by the players. All players skipped the reading description screen and
therefore did not know enough about the attributes of their characters (“Why
is my lion fearful??”). It should be ensured that the players receive this
important information. This could have been realised by using the storyteller
voice which was not possible for technical reasons.
C9) Problem understanding
In the beginning the gaming behaviour was less target-aimed since the
players concentrated on getting to know the game and the game principle.
After that they were able to concentrate on the conflicts in the game scene.
This circumstance has been underestimated; the available time for getting to
know the game scene was too short and the integrated time limit increased
the pressure on the players. Thus criterion C9 has only partly been fulfilled.
58
Additionally the integration of a game guide turned out to be very helpful
choice, at least if the players are children.
C6) Climax preparation
This criterion could not be checked in the case study since the game consists
only of one game scene. For the examination of whether the players have
been prepared well for the plot climax a complete game would have been
necessary.
C5) Coherence
The statements of the players allow concluding that this criterion has fully
been realised: they found the unfolding story sensible, very good and
logical. Therefore the provided plot alternatives which the players
experienced by playing more than once seem to have been coherent.
C8) Leadership-freedom ratio
The balance between leading and freedom of action appeared to be mostly
comfortable for the players. Responsible for the feeling of being too
restricted and helpless was the forced inactivity of two players after some
time of playing: when their characters were blocked due to their late
reaction. This aspect might not be a problem in a complete game but it was
not suitable for the testing of a single game scene. Again the integration of a
game guide turned out to be a very helpful choice (at least for relatively
young players) since it provided the players with a pleasant way of being
lead through the game.
C1) Interactive storytelling
The expectations concerning this special and project-relevant criterion could
be confirmed by the results of case study. It needs to be conceded that a
completely implemented game would increase the validity of this important
criterion. Yet the players‟ perception of influencing the story though only
having experienced a small part of the entire story indicates that the new
game concept effectively provides Interactive Storytelling.
C3) Cooperation
The second special and project-relevant criterion has also been fulfilled: the
cooperative game principle did not only work (the players discussed what to
do) but was also stated by all players as very enjoyable and gameimproving.
C2) Suspense
This general game evaluation criterion has only partly been fulfilled. The
fairy tale character appeared to be unsuitable for two of the players due to
their age, and also the game itself was not challenging enough for them. Yet
the two younger players perceived the game as suspenseful and captivating.
C7) Gaming fun
This further general game evaluation criterion has fully been fulfilled: all
stated that they enjoyed the game very much (amongst others due to its
novel multiplayer aspect).
To summarise, the interpretation of the case study results yielded that five of
eight (C6 is excluded since it is not checkable) criteria were fully met (C5, C8, C1,
59
C3 and C7), only three of eight partly (C4, C9 and C2), and none of them not at
all. This result indicates that the developed game concept works and that the
underlying game principle provides a lot of gaming fun. Furthermore it allows
concluding that the developed approaches were able to solve the examined
problems that were raised by the game concept (cf. 3.1).
Since the observations were integrated to strengthen the expressiveness of
the players‟ statements from the interview I will also state the results of
comparing them with the corresponding questions. None of five observation
answers (O3 has no corresponding interview question) fully match as well not all
match their corresponding interview answer which was not expectable in any
case, especially not for the scale answers. Yet only one observation answer (O1)
does mostly not match its respective interview answer (I2). The replies of O2&I3
and O4&I5 mostly match; the replies of O5&I6 and O6&I8 match partly. This
shows that the observations and the interview answers confirm each other for the
most part; therefore the expressiveness of the case study is increased.
It needs to be mentioned that they are two issues that have not been
considered: questions are not always answerable with Yes or No but also with
something in between like Partly, A little, Mostly etc. A questionnaire of better
quality should respect this. The other issue refers to the missing of questions
which would also have been interesting: Did you enjoy influencing the course of
the story or did you not mind to make decisions with narrative consequences?
Nonetheless the questions have supplied a large amount of valuable information
concerning the criteria and the new game concept consequently.
5.3.2 General Evaluation of the Results
Now that I have evaluated the criteria in special I will proceed with
evaluating the case study in general. The probably most important circumstance is
its non-deniable limited validity and expressiveness. This limitation evolves from
the usage of more than one human observer. Human beings cannot be calibrated;
their observation abilities differ and their estimations are subjective. Therefore
neither their observations nor their interview are able to supply consistent, solid
test results. Unfortunately the usage of a single human observer would not have
been possible since he were not able to observe the facial expressions, gestures
and gaming behaviour of more than one player. An optimal solution represents the
recording of each player with a camera and a video capturing of the game screen
with a following timed examination of the two records displayed side by side.
However, this method was not possible due to technical reasons. Thus the used
method of four human observers provides no solid statements or statistic
relevance but only indicatory hints. Yet these are expressive enough to allow a
rough evaluation of the defined criteria; to lessen the sensitiveness of this method
I formulated most of the questions so that they are to be answered by Yes or No,
and the others by using a Likert scale. The unfavourable distortion of the natural
(non-observed) gaming behaviour of the players has been compensated by the
circumstance that the observing assistants were unexpectedly useful to help the
players out with handling difficulties.
60
Figure 5-10
Schematic diagram of a different setup in
top view
If the players (green) do not use a headset a
better setup is a face to face locating. They are
able to look at each other without the need of
turning around and without the possibility of
checking the screens of the co-players.
A further disadvantage is the number of players I tested the game with. Due
to time constrictions and practical difficulties I was not able to perform the test
with more children. Nonetheless many of their statements correspond – especially
the project-relevant ones (see special evaluation above). Therefore their specific
answers supplied suitable information to evaluate the criteria.
Additionally the testing of a multiplayer game that is designed to be played
by players which are not located in the same room with players which are in the
same room supplies no equivalent results. As a consequence of the chosen back to
back setup the players repeatedly turned around (away from their game screen) to
talk to their co-players and to see what happens on their game screens. This in
turn resulted in an interrupted game flow and was uncomfortable for the players.
The setup should have been changed from to back to face to face (see Figure 5-10)
in order to at least exclude the turning around and the checking of the co-players‟
screens. Therefore I am neither able to state if they would have behaved the same
way with the designated headset nor to deduce the functionality as internet game
from the application of a telephone conference. Again different rooms would
technically not have been possible and in this case would also have avoided an
execution of the test due to the conference failure.
From the answers of the observations and interview it could be concluded
that the design of the game scene was too difficult for at least the young players.
On the other hand the fairy tale story of the game was not thrilling enough for the
older children. In any case a test with more than one game scene would supply a
more significant result of the case study; the first game scene would then serve as
“training mission” for the players to become familiar with this totally new kind of
gaming principle and to get to know the game world unhurriedly. Thus the choice
of using a time limit turns out to not have been very suitable for the first test. The
shown behaviour of the players confirms the assumption that they need some time
to get used to the game: in the beginning they were quite unsure and
incommunicative which continuously improved along playing. Certainly a
completely realised game with increasing challenge would represent the optimal
solution for an expressive case study but due to time restrictions it was not
possible for a single programmer who is also responsible for the elaborate artwork
to implement more than one game scene.
61
Which statements can the case study make that are not measurable and only
limitedly solid? The evaluation of the criteria that bases on the observation and
interviewing of the players clearly indicates that the new game concept holds the
potential to “work”. All players referred to the game as being “new” and
“different”. They enjoyed the cooperative playing which they perceived as “much
better” than playing alone and which “cheered them on” and “adrenalised” them
(translated original quotes). Also all of them enthusiastically replied to the
question if they would favour a complete game of this type with Yes. The
gathered information confirms the expectations from section 1.1 (motivation) and
3.2 (description of game concept) to which I will get back in the following
chapter.
62
Chapter 6: Conclusion
CHAPTER 6:
6. Conclusion
This last chapter will fulfil the function of summarising the essential points of the
project, showing it in a future-oriented, broader context and critically judging its
success.
6.1
Summarisation
In the first section of the last chapter of the present Master‟s thesis I will
summarise the now accomplished research work on Interactive Storytelling in
Multiplayer Role-Playing Games. This work was motivated by a lack of existing
games that base on Interactive Storytelling wherein more than one player is
affects the development of the played story. Out of this circumstance a new game
concept evolved: a Multiplayer Role-Playing Network Game on the basis of
Interactive Storytelling.
The core of this idea contains that multiple players have the ability to
commonly develop the story they are playing; the course of the unfolding story
shall depend on the players‟ actions. Each player possesses his own game
character as well as his special relevance within the game. Thereby all players
control the game via an own computer. Furthermore a new aspect is part of the
game: the players shall be able to communicate with each other while they are
playing by talking to each other and on this basis exchange views about the game
and come to decisions conjointly. This aspect creates a second level alongside the
previous dramatic one: the social level. The storytelling and the communication
are interconnected and of equal importance for the gameplay.
The aspects of the game concept now raised two main problems. On the one
hand a well-known Interactive Storytelling problem was raised to a higher level
since it needed to be solved for more players than the usual one: To keep the
unfolding story dramatic although multiple players shall noticeably influence the
its course. On the other hand a new problem emerged: Since according to the
game concept the players shall conjointly decide on their actions it had to be
examined how to encourage cooperative gaming behaviour between the players.
I was able to develop different approaches to solve these difficulties (see
3.1). These approaches formed the basis for the development of a game concept
that finally represented all aspects of the new game concept (see 3.2).
Substantially the concept represents a narrative game of which the story is being
automatically generated. Thereby the game designer appears as author of the story
who entirely pre-generates it with the suitable number of plot alternatives. The
63
6.2 Future Prospects
players rather take over the roles of directors having the possibility of deciding on
the course the story takes between a certain preset starting situation and one or
more prepared endings.
In order to check the developed game concept on its usefulness and quality
(and therewith the new game concept) I implemented an exemplary game
allowing me to test the realised concept in a small case study with unbiased real
players. The analysis of the requirements of the concept on an adequate
implementation entailed that the implementation did not require the development
of any technical innovations since the existing techniques provided all that was
needed for the realisation of the game concept (see 4.1).
For the qualitative evaluation of the results of the case study I derived
criteria from the developed concept (see 3.3). These also formed the basis for a
questionnaire that was answered on the basis of observing the players‟ gaming
behaviour and interviewing them. The story I chose for the game (see 5.1)
demanded four players being children around the age of ten. After the case study
all children stated that they enjoyed the new gaming principle very much,
especially due to its extension on multiple players. They perceived the unfolding
story as being the result of their actions that would have taken a different course if
they had made acted differently. They also indicated the passionate wish to play a
fully matured version of the new game.
However, the following conclusions have no universal validity since the
case study has not only been qualitatively evaluated but also – due to time
restrictions – not extensive enough to make it solid. From the evaluation of the
case study results I inferred that the new game concept represents a not only
working but also very popular new gaming principle that is worth being
developed further. In general I concluded that interactive dramas for multiple
players can indeed be more enjoyable than single player interactive dramas - if
they are realised appropriately. (see sec. 5.3)
6.2
Future Prospects
This section shall provide an outlook on possible applications of my work,
reveal open questions and last but not least discuss potential extensions and
alterations of it.
Due to the positive results of my work I consider the new game concept as
being worth a realisation for the games market. Certainly further examinations
would have to precede a commercial production. Here a modern solution could
also be represented by the implementation as browser-based online game, taking
the currently more and more present multiplayer browser games from almost each
existing game genre as an example (see Figure 6-1). These basically only require
64
a web browser and a common plugin such as Java or Flash (some are also serverside based) which suites the realisation of the game concept as network game.
Concerning the sample game which was written for the case study I
consider a commercial realisation as practicable and sensible possibility to make
direct use of my work, for the contained story turned out to be a very suitable plot
for multiplayer interactive dramas. In this context I see a large potential to adapt
the new game concept to educational games for children. Children learn mostly
better in groups than on their own; furthermore they get used to teamwork and
experience the popular “togetherness-feeling” – both training their social
behaviour. All these aspects are promoted by the cooperation part of the new
game concept.
Now, which questions have been raised by the project that remain
unanswered? During the project I could not clarify how the game could react if
one client loses the contact to the server. In such a case the game basically cannot
continue since the number of players is not variable; the plot had to stop, the other
players were stuck on hold, and the gaming flow would be interrupted – with the
result of a reduction of gaming fun that possibly can be evaded.
Another serious issue are those scenes wherein not each player can be active
due to events in the story; in my sample game scene two of the player characters
are likely to be blocked since it is a logical, sensible result of the player actions. It
would be quite difficult to realise an uninterrupted involvement of each character
(player) for every scene of an entire game if the played story shall be realistic,
sensible, suspenseful and diversified.
Also the work was not able to examine the minimally and especially
maximally possible number of players for the new gaming principle since I have
designed my exemplary implementation for a fixed number of four players (which
Figure 6-1
Screenshot of the browser
game D-Wars
© D-Wars.com 2006
65
6.2 Future Prospects
Figure 6-2
Screenshot of a Business Video
Conference
The screen is divided into parts of
different contents; only approx. a third
is assigned to the actual programme.
© WORLDVIDEOBUSINESS 2005
turned out to be a very good number). Would two players be enthralling enough
(surely it reduces the complexity of the game), and six players too much for a
sensible interactive drama; or is there even an ideal number of players?
An especially interesting question is: Is there a possibility to add a feature to
the game that allows the players to make decisions commonly by voting instead of
discussing? If so, a single player could not act against the will of his co-players,
and common decisions are forced instead of only being promoted. Would such a
feature disturb the gaming flow then, and would it restrict the players too much?
Alongside the previous questions, further interesting issues arose during the
work that could provide suggestions for further works in the field of Interactive
Storytelling for multiple players. I consider the following extension- and
alteration possibilities worth a realisation since they seem to promise an
improvement of the game in my view.
A very interesting option represents the extension of the VoIP communication by
a video conference (cf. Figure 6-1). Thus the players cannot only hear each other
but also see one another. Such an element would certainly reduce the GUI space
for the game scene but probably increase the gaming fun since a face is capable of
expressing more emotions than the pure voice. Thereby it might be
disadvantageous that the designated immersion into the game world is being
weakened and the game play interrupted due to elements from real-life which
would be visible within the game scene.
A promising alteration would be a permanent player-dependent view of the
game scene instead of only presenting individual cut scenes that are currently part
of the developed game. This feature would amplify the communication between
the players since they will have the desire to tell the other players about what
these cannot see. The game designer could take advantage of this by integrating
the different perspectives into the story (for example with items that are hidden to
all players except one).
66
© Blizzard Entertainment
2005
Figure 6-3
Some of the many available “emotes” in the
MMORPG World of WarCraft
The players can assign a large number of facial expressions
and gestures to their characters in form of slash commands.
Furthermore an interesting add-on could be to provide the players with the
opportunity of giving their characters facial expressions (also imaginable:
gestures)31. This feature is already integrated in many MMORPGs (see Figure
6-3). Since the game concept contains and sets a high value to the social level of
the game these expressions would help to express the players‟ attitudes and
emotions concerning the decisions that are to be made by them. For the sake of
feasibility already a small number of facial expressions would suffice (like anger,
sadness, happiness, contentedness and neutrality) to map the message of the
players on their characters.
Also conceivable would be the idea of working with the voice channel of
the VoIP. Thereby the voice of a player could be tested on stress, harmony and
other recognisable voice patterns. The gained information could be applied to the
behaviour of the characters by altering the offered actions or the interaction with
other characters, or their facial expressions. Admittedly this idea announces high
technical challenges as well as a probably large complexity concerning the
conversion.
A probably most interesting alternation emerges from the possibility of
replacing the cooperative game principle by a competing one! Thus the aim
would not be common but individual: that is to say, to perform better or even to
31
Facial animations are offered in e.g. the MMORPG Star Wars Galaxies (Verant Interactive/
LucasArts 2003); body animations are available in e.g. the MMORPG EverQuest II (Verant
Interactive 1999).
67
6.3 Critical Evaluation
win. Certainly this, for storytelling extraordinary game principle, would increase
the complexity of the game since it requires different endings, but surely a plot
can be designed in a way that it demands egoistic or even antagonistic gaming
behaviour in order to successfully reach the end of the game.
A second especially remarkable extension yields a not new aspect of
Adventures with more than one player character: the separation of the main
character (cf. Figure 6-4 on p. 72). A single player is not able to control both at
the same time but multiple players are! Parts of the game could be played without
sharing the task and the game scene with the co-players. They would get back
personal responsibility and individuality giving variety of the usual “group
pressure”. This extension has the potential to increase suspense and gaming fun
again but is not easily to be realisable by the game designer.
A last possibility that in contrary to the previous ideas is not capable of
increasing the gaming fun would be the examination of the behaviour patterns of
the players, especially in multiplayer interactive dramas for children. For this
purpose each player action could be provided with a mark that indicates the kind
of the respective shown player behaviour by executing this action: cooperative or
competing, conducive or hindering, etc. This makes it possible to evaluate the
behaviour of the players over the time and concerning certain kinds of problems
and different degrees of difficulties that are to be solved by the players. Certainly
the players do not benefit from a social rating system except the results are drawn
on in real-time to alter the further development of the story or the further conflicts
(making the game designer‟s work very complex and difficult!). To display the
degree of previous and/ or current cooperation or competition of each player to all
players would be rather senseless since the players experience their behaviours
while playing anyway.
Recapitulating, the new game concept and its realisation have brought up
some quite interesting questions for the field of Interactive Storytelling that my
work cannot answer but that I consider as being worth an examination.
Additionally the present work contains a considerable potential concerning
various extensions and alterations which announce an enhancement of the gaming
fun and therefore appear to be worthy of further research and possibly even a
realisation.
6.3
Critical Evaluation
In the last section of the final chapter of the present Master‟s thesis I will
discuss and interpret the results of the accomplished research project. For this
purpose I will compare its results with the expectations and aims described in
chapter 1. Furthermore an overview of the game restrictions shall be given in
68
consideration of the possible resulting disadvantages as well as presenting the
advantages of the new gaming principle in comparison with other games of
similar kind. Concluding the thesis I will discuss the accomplished research work
in general.
6.3.1 Evaluation of Aims
In section 1.2 I have defined the following practical aims (A-E). I will now
clarify if they have been achieved fully, partly, or not at all, and justify my
estimation.
A) Story interactivity: The final story is a product of the actions of all
participating players.
Aim A has been achieved fully. All available alternative player actions result
in a consequence on the course of the story and are distributed on all players.
The plot advances only after executing the actions of different players.
The participants of the case study also confirmed the story interactivity.
B) Narrative structure: The story follows the dramatic arc.
Aim B has been achieved fully. The plot is being mapped on a dramatic arc.
Independent of which path the players take through the plot graph they will
experience all parts of a complete dramatic arc.
C) Fun factor of story: The emerged story has been suspenseful, entertaining
and sensible.
Aim C has been achieved partly. The unfolding story is sensible since every
action results in a sensible and logic consequence, and this in turn reasonably
alters the course of the story. The participants of the case study also
confirmed the coherence of the story. The unfolding story is only partly
entertaining and suspenseful. Partly „yes‟ since the players are provided with
rewarding and unexpected story events; partly „not‟ since two participants of
the case study stated their blocked characters reduced fun and suspense.
D) Flow of gaming fun: The players shall continuously be kept in the flow of
gaming fun.
Aim D has been achieved partly. According to the case study the gaming
principle was not intuitive in the beginning but getting better during the game.
Also the degree of difficulty was perceived differently by the participants of
the case study.
E) Ratio of leadership & freedom: Concerning their action the players are
content with the experienced mixture of leading and freedom.
Aim E has been achieved mostly. This aim was realised by providing the
players with a suitable numbers of available actions instead of giving them the
ability to develop the plot freely. Furthermore the game contains a guiding
character which is controlled by the game and leads the players through the
story by advising them whenever they need help or information.
The participants of the case study confirmed a mostly good balance of being
lead and action of freedom, and furthermore the usefulness of the game guide.
69
Summarising, the five defined practical aims that all describe an
ascertainable condition could mostly be achieved by the realisation of the
intended approaches that I also described. They also provide the answer to the
question of what needs to be considered if creating a multiplayer interactive
drama.
Next I will go come back to the scientific aim of my thesis. In section 1.2 I named
as overall aim of my research work the task to answer the following four
questions. My answers base on the results of my small case study and are
therefore not universally valid.
1. Does this new game concept work at all?
My answers correspond with my earlier expectation: According to the results
of my small case study the new game concept represents a very well working
gaming principle.
2. Does an interactive drama for multiple players come with more gaming fun
than a single player interactive drama?
Games with an interactive story that are to be played by multiple players seem
to be more enjoyable than single player ones but this heavily depends on the
realisation and further factors (e.g., the kind of target group or the personality
of the players).
3. Does the new game concept provide a lot fun-to-play? If it does: Why?
Interactive storytelling by multiple players provides very likely a lot gaming
fun. According to the players the reasons for the gaming fun were mainly the
multiplayer aspect, the distributed, shared gaming and the chosen story itself.
4. Can an interactive game story still be dramatic even if more than one player
controls its development, i.e., is Interactive Storytelling suitable at all for
multiple players?
It is possible to ensure the dramatic course of an interactive story of which the
developments depends on multiple players; my work represents one possible
solution. It needs to be admitted that probably each solution results in a
reduction of the degree of the story interactivity. The multiplayer aspect does
not make the realisation more difficult to realise than for single player games
but it certainly increases its complexity. The results of the case study allow
concluding that Interactive Storytelling is even very suitable for multiple
players. The multiplayer-ability could get Interactive Storytelling to become
very popular.
Concluding, my research work yielded positive results. However, like every
other concept the newly developed game concept is subject to restrictions as well.
These will be depicted in the following taking into account if they are
disadvantageous for the players.
6.3.2 Restrictions
A first game restriction is represented by the automatic generation of its
story. The story cannot be developed freely by the players – its degree of
interactivity is thus limited. All story events are predefined by the game designer.
70
Thus the players do not appear as story authors but rather as directors who can
decide on the course of the story through the plot. Yet I do not see a disadvantage
in this limitation – players mostly feel overstrained if they are given too much
freedom of action.
Furthermore the fixed gaming length that evolves from a fixed plot length of
the game concept can be interpreted as a restriction. If the story is interactive, why
is its length not variable? Surely a variable length would be more enjoyable since
it increases the interactivity of the story, yet it makes the maintaining of the
dramatic art of the plot much more difficult. In spite of different exit points the
dramatic structure of the plot needs to be ensured. Such an exit point should for
example not be available without having experienced a story climax. Yet I do
perceive the non-variable gaming length only as a limitation but not as
disadvantage.
Another game restriction is represented by the number of alternative
endings. This limitation evolves from the demand of providing the characters/
players with a common aim they strive for in order to accomplish the game. This
circumstance unfavourably reduces the interactivity of the story. This limitation
only turns into a small disadvantage if the players play the game again:
Independent of all their action decisions the game ends with achieving the
common aim of their characters. Thus variable endings would increase the replayability of the game.
A further game limitation is established by the dependency of number of
players on the predefined story. For this number is not variable; contrary to the
most multiplayer games it is not possible to chose the number of players at the
beginning of the game. The reason for this is the emerging story that shall be
interactive: therein the players take over the roles of the (fixed number of) main
characters. If there is one player more or less the predefined story cannot be
adapted to this change. Probably this problem is not completely impossible to
overcome but its solution would be a huge challenge due to the emerging
complexity. Of course also NPCs could take over missing main characters but this
would contradict the new game concept and is not satisfying as long as NPCs
show such an unrealistic behaviour as they do nowadays.
For the same reason the game cannot proceed in case a player stops playing.
It is very likely that the players do not want to play the game in one go or that all
players have enough time for doing so. In this case all players have to leave the
game and come back later when all of them have time for it.
A disadvantage could be represented by the restriction that the player
characters are due to the developed game concept always in the same game scene;
for it is not fully realistic to always stay in the group, especially if a conflict
would be easier solvable if they separate. Many stories wherein more than one
main character exist contain situations that demand a separation of these
characters in order to allow absolving own tasks. Adventures like Maniac
Mansion: Day of the Tentacle32 or Broken Sword II: The Smoking Mirror33
demonstrate this principle very well but the single player can only play one
32
33
LucasArts 1993
Revolution Software 1997
71
Figure 6-4
Two screenshots of Broken Sword II: The Smoking Mirror
The two main characters (George and Nico) separate many times in
the game to get tasks done. The single player controls one after
another; thereby the game switched again and again between both
characters.
© Revolution Software
1997
character at a time (cf. Figure 6-4). Nonetheless this feature turned out to be quite
popular since it makes the playing more diversified. To provide the players with
the ability to split up other at times could widely increase the gaming fun!
This restriction is linked with to the contained encouraging of cooperative
gaming behaviour: it possibly suppresses the natural individuality of a player.
Since only cooperation enables the players to reach the end of the game, a player
might feel forced to act against his natural desire to behave egoistically which also
might logically be able to solve a conflict. The young participants of the case
study stated that they enjoyed the common decision making but this might be
different for grown up players often appreciating individuality and having
responsibility. This circumstance could indeed be perceived as disadvantage for
the gaming fun but would have to be examined in further research.
A last restriction evolves from the aspect of the game concept that spreads
the tasks, which are to be executed for the plot to advance, on all players. This
aspect has the purpose to ensure that each player is involved in the development
of the interactive story. If a player has accomplished his task whereas his coplayers do not, this player is forced to be inactive until his next task comes up. For
some time his participation in the game is being reduced to the communication
with the other players. This limitation of the player involvement can be
interpreted as disadvantageous but not necessarily has to; in my opinion this rating
differs from player to player depending on his personality.
Summarising, none of the discussed restrictions yields serious disadvantages
for the gaming fun or the functioning of the new gaming principle. However, how
is the new game concept to be judged on the whole?
6.3.3 Conclusion of Work
In the section Motivation (1.1) I stated that I expected the new game
concept to increase the gaming fun of Interactive Storytelling. I was able to
confirm this expectation for the participating players of my case study. Yet the
new game entails more than this advantage. Considering the social aspect of the
game it shows that the gaming principle promotes team work and the human
72
social behaviour; single player interactive dramas are not capable of that
promotion.
Additionally this Adventure like game can be played over the internet. That
means the social component of the game is not limited to the personal (human)
environment of the players. It can be played with friends but also with strangers
(which works, as the MOGs demonstrate).
Especially the new guide element seems to improve the game concept. Very
often the player needed to cheat in order to be able to continue an Adventure
game, resulting in frustration and weakened motivation to play too difficult or too
crazy Adventures. The element of providing the player with the possibility of
asking for advice is not completely new; extremely few Adventures offered this
feature, but never integrated this element in the plot. The players of the new game
concept will not have to cheat – they may consult the game guide or the game
guide can independently detect if help is needed. As part of the story world this
innovation does not take the players out of the gaming flow.
Generally the new game concept represents an adaptation of Adventure
games to the continuously strengthening trend of multiplayer games,
demonstrated by the sudden huge amount and variety of multiplayer online
games. Over this development in the computer games industry Adventures fell
somewhat into oblivion if compared with earlier times. Adventures game designer
tried to keep up with the other more and more popular games by replacing the 2D
graphics by the seemingly better 3D graphics but this “improvement” was not
apparently able to compensate the increased desire for multiplayer gaming of
these days.
Yet the success of the new gaming principle heavily depends on its
realisation. Altogether I see the central difficulty of good digital storytelling for
multiple players as a result of the strong interdisciplinarity of the new game
concept which combines the fields of Multiplayer Gaming, Dramatic Narration
and Digital Interactive Storytelling. Each of these fields comes with its own
typical problems that therefore turn to problems of this game concept. This
interdisciplinarity creates a wide complexity in not only one subarea of the new
game concept, and this complexity reduces the controllability of all factors a game
designer has to deal with. The multiplayer aspect has to cope with how to realise
cooperation and competition; the narrative aspect struggles with a possible lack of
story development, false motivation, implausible characters, holes and more
[Hartm07]. The aspect of story interactivity comes with the problem of finding an
optimal ratio of leading the players and freedom of action making it difficult to
ensure the important dramatic art of interactive stories.
Nonetheless I see a huge potential in Interactive Storytelling in Multiplayer
Role-Playing Games; the really good games enchant with a dramatic story and a
social component!
73
Bibliography
Bibliography
The following list of literature contains printed sources as well as online sources.
All internet addresses are as at August 2008.
[Adams99a]
[Adams99b]
[ArisBC]
[Bailey1999]
[Campbell48]
[Chrawf04]
[Egri46]
[FaSiHo05]
[Frey1863]
[Hartm04]
[Hartm07]
Adams, E.: It's Time To Bring Back Adventure Games. The
Designers Notebook Column on Gamasutra - The Art &
Science of Making Games, Nov 1999
http://designersnotebook.com/ and http://www.gamasutra.com/
Adams, E.: Three Problems for Interactive Storytellers. The
Designers Notebook Column on Gamasutra - The Art &
Science of Making Games, Dec 1999
http://designersnotebook.com/ and http://www.gamasutra.com/
Aristotle: Poetics. Approx. 350 B.C.
Bailey, P.: Searching for Storiness: Story-Generation from
a Reader's Perspective. In AAAI Fall Symposium on
Narrative Intelligence 1999
Campbell, J.: The Hero With a Thousand Faces. Princeton
University Press, Princeton 1948
Crawford, C.: Chris Crawford on Interactive Storytelling.
New Riders Publishing, Oct 2004
Egri, L.: Art of Dramatic Writing: Its Basis in the Creative
Interpretation of Human Motives. Simon and Schuster, New
York, 1946
http://www.writerswrite.com/fiction/egri.htm
MacFarlane, S., Sim, G., Horton, M.: Assessing usability and
fun in educational software. Paper, IDC2005, pp.103-109,
Boulder, CO, USA 2005
Freytag, G.: Technique of the Drama: An Exposition of
Dramatic Composition and Art. University Press of the
Pacific, 2004. (Original: Die Technik des Dramas. Hirzel
Leipzig, 1863)
Hartmann, K.: Create & Play: Exploiting the Dramatic
Experience of Children by Playing Adventure Games. In
Informatik 2004 - Informatik verbindet; Beiträge der 34.
Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), p. 191–
195, 2004
Hartmann, K.: Interactive Drama: The Art of Crafting
Stories for Interactive Media. Unpublished manuscript,
Faculty of Computer Science, Otto-von-Guericke University
Magdeburg, Publication in 2008
75
[Jenkins04]
[Kelly04]
[KierLass05]
[Kolloff00]
[Lott00]
[Mateas02]
[Mateas97]
[Meadows03]
[Miller04]
[Mosel05]
[Orive05]
[Propp28]
[Quince07]
[RieYou05]
[Ryan01]
76
Jenkins, H.: Game Design as Narrative Architecture.
http://web.mit.edu/cms/People/henry3/games&narrative.html,
Oct 2004
Kelly, V. R.: Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing
Games: The People, the Addiction and the Playing
Experience. McFarland & Company Aug 2004
Kierdorf, W. & Lassahn, M.: Interview über Linearität von
Adventures.
http://www.Adventure-treff.de/artikel/interviews.php?id=39,
Dec 2005
Kolloff, S.: "... und wenn sie nicht gestorben sind ..." - Nonlineare Erzählstrukturen und Produktionsprozesse von
Multimedia-CD-ROMs. Article in TELEVISION 13/2000/1
http://www.br-online.de/jugend/izi/text/kolloff.htm
Lott, G.: Deus Ex. Article in GameStar 07/2000
Mateas, M. J.: Interactive Drama, Art and Artificial
Intelligence. PHD thesis, Computer Science Department,
Carnegie Mellon University, Dec 2002
Mateas, M. J.: An Oz-Centric Review of Interactive Drama
and Believable Agents. Carnegie Mellon CS Tech Report,
1997
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/oz/web/papers/CMU-CS97-156.html
Meadows, M. St.: Pause & Effect: the art of interactive
narrative. New Riders Sep 2003
http://www.pause-effect.com/
Miller, C. H.: Digital Storytelling – a creator’s guide to
interactive entertainment. Focal Press 2004
Mosel, M.: Interactive Storytelling. Term paper. University of
Marburg, Sept 2005
http://www.experimentelles.org/
Orive, A. de: /dev-Talk - Im Gespräch mit Aaron de Orive.
Article in /GameStar/dev 02/2005: p. 18-21
Propp, V. J.: Morphology of the Folktale. University of Texas
Press 1970 (Original in Russian from 1928)
Quince, E.: The Blue Quill - A Writing Reference: Dramatic
Structure.
http://www.gabwhacker.com/xwp/bluequill/drama1.asp?displa
y=arc, 2007
Riedl, M. O. & Young, R. M.: From Linear Story
Generation to Branching Story Graphs. American
Association for Artificial Intelligence, 2005
Ryan, M.-L.: Narrative as Virtual Reality: Immersion and
Interactivity in Literature and Electronic Media. Baltimore:
John Hopkins University Press 2001
Bibliography
[Sander06]
[Schmidt05]
[SiFaHo05]
[Skaggs04]
[Steinlech04]
[Szilas99]
[Trogem02]
[Vogler02]
[Walk05]
[Weidem04]
[Wolkow82]
Sander, F.: Interaktive Dramaturgie - Von Aristoteles bis
zum interaktiven Drama.
http://www.kreativrauschen.de/text/interaktivedramaturgie.pdf, 2006
Schmidt, C.: Fahrenheit. Article in GameStar 10/2005: p. 104107
Sim, G., MacFarlane, S., Horton, M.: Evaluating Usability,
Fun and Learning in Educational Software for Children.
World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia
and Telecommunications, Montreal 2005
Skaggs, M.: Traumspiele 2004: Multiplayer - Mehrspieler
für mehr Spielspaß. Article in GameStar 05/2004: p. 54-56
Steinlechner, P.: PS: Traumspiele 2004: Story - Spannung
im Spiel. Article in GameStar 04/2004: p. 54-56
Szilas, N.: Interactive Drama on Computer: Beyond Linear
Narrative. AAAI Fall Symposium on Narrative Intelligence,
AAAI Press, 1999
Trogemann, G.: AUGMENTING HUMAN CREATIVITY:
Virtuelle Realitäten als Design-Aufgabe. in Virtuelle
Realitäten, Reihe Internet & Psychologie 2002
Vogler, C.: The Writer’s Journey: Mythic Structure for
Writers. Michael Wiese Productions, Oct 1998
Walk, W.: Regeln für Hund und Katze – Story
Development. In /GameStar/dev 02/2005: p. 14-17
Weidemann, T.: Traumspiele 2004: Multiplayer Mehrspieler für mehr Spielspaß. Article in GameStar
05/2004: p. 54-56
Wolkow, A.: Der Zauberer der Smaragdenstadt. RadugaVerlag Moskau 1982
77
Appendix
Appendix
Content
A)
B)
C)
D)
E)
F)
A)
Page
List of Figures ............................................................................................. 79
List of Tables .............................................................................................. 81
Additional Information ............................................................................... 82
Further Screenshots of the Game ................................................................ 83
Further Photos of the Case Study ............................................................... 86
Questionnaire of the Case Study................................................................. 87
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Screenshot of The Curse of Monkey Island:.......................................... 2
Figure 1-2 Screenshot of the MMORPG World of WarCraft: ................................ 3
Figure 1-3 The Dramatic Arc (simplified) .............................................................. 5
Figure 2-1 Types of Player-Computer-Room setting.............................................. 9
Figure 2-2 Screenshot of Quake II showing a four players – split-screen ........... 10
Figure 2-3 Four Wii Sports players sharing one non-split screen ......................... 10
Figure 2-4 Screenshot of multiple players in the MMORPG World of WarCraft 11
Figure 2-5 Screenshot of the player‟s decision point in Indiana Jones and the Fate
of Atlantis .............................................................................................................. 13
Figure 2-6 Schematic graphic of the mapping of the dramatic arc onto a partly
non-linear (A) and fully non-linear plot graph (B) ............................................... 14
Figure 2-7 Plot linearity and plot structure (considered strictly) .......................... 15
Figure 2-8 Connectivity of plot linearity and story interactivity (strict) ............... 16
Figure 2-9 Example for a Nodal Plot Structure .................................................... 18
Figure 2-10 Example for a Modulated Plot Structures ......................................... 18
Figure 2-11 Example for an Open Plot Structures ................................................ 18
Figure 2-12 Screenshot of Schneewittchen und die sieben Hänsel ....................... 20
Figure 2-13 Screenshot of Deus Ex ...................................................................... 21
Figure 2-14 Screenshot of Fahrenheit ................................................................. 22
79
Figure 3-1 The connection of the dramatic and the social level (by the example of
two players) ........................................................................................................... 26
Figure 3-2 Application of story mechanisms to game mechanisms ...................... 28
Figure 3-3 Dramatic art of the single stages of the plot ........................................ 31
Figure 4-1 A schematic representation of a server based network (A) and a peerto-peer (P2P) based network.................................................................................. 41
Figure 4-2 Schematic diagram of the software architecture .................................. 41
Figure 4-3 Flow diagram of the server- and client programme resp. .................... 42
Figure 4-4 The schematic GUI of the game scene ................................................ 43
Figure 4-5 Results of the combination of the inventory or “actiontory” with the
game world ............................................................................................................ 45
Figure 5-1 Introduction screen (part 2) ................................................................. 50
Figure 5-2 Role distribution screen (part 3) .......................................................... 51
Figure 5-3 Character description screen (part 4) ................................................... 51
Figure 5-4 Map screen (part 5) .............................................................................. 51
Figure 5-5 Game scene (part 6) ............................................................................. 52
Figure 5-6 Cutscene screen (part 7) ....................................................................... 52
Figure 5-7 Schematic diagram of the setup in top view ........................................ 53
Figure 5-8 Photograph of the setup ....................................................................... 55
Figure 5-9 Photograph of the interview with the players ...................................... 55
Figure 5-10 Schematic diagram of a different setup in top view .......................... 61
Figure 6-1 Screenshot of the browser game D-Wars ............................................ 65
Figure 6-2 Screenshot of a Business Video Conference ....................................... 66
Figure 6-3 Some of the many available “emotes” in the MMORPG World of
WarCraft ................................................................................................................ 67
Figure 6-4 Two screenshots of Broken Sword II: The Smoking Mirror ................ 72
Figure 0-1 The GUI of a classical point-and-click Adventure .............................. 82
Figure 0-2 The Hero’s Journey (aka Monomyth) according to Vogler ................. 82
Figure 0-3 Start screen of “Smaragdenzauber” (in English: “Emerald Magic”)
(part 1) ................................................................................................................... 83
Figure 0-4 Another introduction screen (part 2) .................................................... 83
Figure 0-5 Role distribution screen (part 3) .......................................................... 83
Figure 0-6 Another character description screen (part 4) ...................................... 84
Figure 0-7 Zoom in map screen (part 5) ................................................................ 84
Figure 0-8 Another game scene screen (part 6) ..................................................... 84
Figure 0-9 Another game scene screen (part 6) ..................................................... 85
80
Appendix
Figure 0-10 Another game scene screen (part 6) .................................................. 85
Figure 0-11 A different cutscene screen (part 7) .................................................. 85
Figure 0-12 Photo of the players while playing .................................................... 86
Figure 0-13 Photo of the player observation ......................................................... 86
Figure 0-14 Photo of the interview with the players ............................................. 86
Figure 0-15 Page 1 of 3 of the case study questionnaire....................................... 87
B)
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Comparison of the three types of plot structures .................................. 19
Table 2-2 Comparison of the three presented games basing on Interactive
Storytelling ............................................................................................................ 22
Table 4-1 Used components of the game engine .................................................. 40
Table 5-1 The classification of the main characters.............................................. 48
Table 5-2 and Table 5-3 Observation- (O1-O6) and interview questions (I1-I8) . 55
Table 5-4 The results of the observation ............................................................... 56
Table 5-5 The answers of the interview with the players ..................................... 58
81
C)
Additional Information
Figure 0-1
The GUI of a classical pointand-click Adventure
In this case: Maniac Mansion:
Day of the Tentacle
© LucasArts 1993
Figure 0-2
The Hero’s Journey (aka Monomyth) according to Vogler
The twelve stations, in turn, base on the Monomyth according to
Campbell (see [Vogler02] and [Campbell48] resp.)
82
© 2003 A. Borzyskowski
Appendix
D)
Further Screenshots of the Game
Figure 0-3
Start screen of
“Smaragdenzauber”
(in English: “Emerald
Magic”) (part 1)
The screenshot shows the four
main characters and the emerald
city
.
Figure 0-4
Another introduction screen
(part 2)
Dorothy meets the first of the
other characters and gets to
know his back story and wish.
Figure 0-5
Role distribution screen
(part 3)
The players are being asked to
select the characters they want to
play by the game guide.
83
Figure 0-6
Another character description
screen
(part 4)
Each player is being provided
with private information about
the attributes of his character by
the game guide.
Figure 0-7
Zoom in map screen
(part 5)
The players are being introduced
into the place their characters
just arrived at.
Figure 0-8
Another game scene screen
(part 6)
The game guide advises the
player characters to leave the
poppy field quickly.
84
Appendix
Figure 0-9
(part 6)
This screenshot shows the
inventory items and the action
execution that follows from
using one of them with the
game world.
Figure 0-10
(part 6)
This screenshot shows the
“actiontory” actions (in orange)
and the action execution that
follows from using one of them
with the game world.
Figure 0-11
A different cutscene screen
(part 7)
One of the characters died in the
game scene. The reason is
explained to the players and why
the game cannot proceed.
85
E)
Further Photos of the Case Study
Figure 0-12
Photo of the players while
playing
Figure 0-13
Photo of the player
observation
Figure 0-14
Photo of the interview with
the players
86
Appendix
F)
Questionnaire of the Case Study
Figure 0-15
Page 1 of 3 of the case study questionnaire
87
Figure 0-16
88
Appendix
Figure 0-17
89

Master`s thesis

Transcrição

Documentos relacionados

Let`s Play Let`s Play Guidelines from the Guidelines from the

Ð˜o Ð˜ame Boys - 2016 Game Sheet - Men`s X

You`re invited to the Eurotour! Date: 4, 5 and 6 September 2015

field testes as predictors of vo2 max and anaerobic threshold

42 - Tornar antieconômica qualquer remoção de vegetação nativa

Dragon Slayers

Mathematical Games, Abstract Games - Jorge Nuno Silva

INTERNATIONAL HIGH PERFORMANCE UNIT PROGRAMMES

Golf Specials Green Fees 17.02.16.22.pub

Emergence of Fairness in Repeated Group - gaips - INESC-ID