GDC 2010 – Submission – Agency and Authorship

The second submission has the really long title of  “Plot and Purpose: the Non-Existent Conflict Between Agency and Authorship in Game Stories“, which though accurate is a mouth full. My guess is if the lecture submission is accepted it will be shortened.  Here’s the submission:

Plot and Purpose: the Non-Existent Conflict Between Agency and Authorship in Game Stories

Exercise:
Choose an action verb, past tense. [VERB]
Choose a game character sounding name. [CHARACTER]
Select a noun that is a familial or personal relationship [RELATIONSHIP]

“Hello. My name is [CHARACTER]. You [VERB] my [RELATIONSHIP]. Prepare to die.”

Congratulations, you’re written the premise of too many action-driven computer games.

Seriously, though, many recent top-tier games have fortunately moved beyond this structure. Entire discussions could be based on the meaning and execution of each portion of that sentence: The player/character, the inciting action, the emotional stake in the story, and so on. Instead, this presentation looks at the last part – “Prepare to die.” – the Desired Resolution – which is the Character’s response to the Inciting Action and how that’s crafted in a game story.

The Desired Resolution is what the Character wants… but it isn’t what the Character does. In order to achieve the Desired Resolution, the Character follows a Course of Action that brings about the ultimate outcome. This Course of Action is what the player/character can do within the structure, or allowances, of the game, which is the simplest expression of Agency, created by the “author” for the player to experience. Authorship doesn’t conflict with Agency – it enables it.

This presentation talks about defying the traditional story creation paradigm of conceiving of, and then plotting, the story from the beginning, through the middle, to the end. Once the writer has fleshed out the main plot – the primary Course of Action – that’s when they think about the alternatives… but look at the words used: Primary. Main. It establishes the desired set of events and it’s very hard to weave in alternatives. For telling interactive stories – game stories – don’t start from the beginning –start from the end. Construct possibilities based on desired outcomes.

Since there is no right plot thread or Course of Action, this presentation talks about determining what elements of the Desired Resolution are variables, affected by choice (Agency) – As obvious examples, is death required for the antagonist’s downfall? Does an ally change sides due to the character’s actions? And so on. Decide what the states for these narrative variables are and then devise what Courses of Action can affect these states.  Once all these options are defined – within the constraints and allowances of gameplay and content creation –weave them together into the web of all of the possible Courses of Action leading to the Desired Resolution. Authorship enables Agency.

Attendees of this lecture will be exposed to not only theoretical talk about Agency and Authorship, and the false conflict between them in game and interactive stories, but also practical considerations and possible solutions to enabling and expanding Agency in game stories. What kinds of narrative variables are practical to work with? How do we deal with the constraints of content creation? How are gameplay and Agency interrelated, but not the same? Some answers to the big question of “Yes, that’s all well and good, but how do we do this?” will be presented.

(c)2009 Tom Dowd. All Rights Reserved.

Read Full Post »

GDC 2010 – Submission – “Designing Gatsby”

I’ve sent in two submissions for GDC 2010, one is a lecture and the other is a roundtable. I’ll be taking time to jabber about each on this site, but for the moment, here’s the information on the first, a roundtable submission:

Designing Gatsby

Designers, and critics, of narrative-driven computer games speak often of a desire to find deeper meaning in game stories and plots. Is it possible, or do the constraints of the medium prevent the inclusion of more so-called literary qualities in game stories? Thus far, the narrative structure of games has relied more on film than anything else, but should it? Should, instead, we be looking at novels and short stories for inspiration? Using the “Great American Novel” – The Great Gatsby – as a lens, jumping-off point, and crucible, this roundtable discusses how more literary concepts related to character, setting, perspective, drama or melodrama, structure, and so on can be applied to games and interactive narrative. All of this must also be looked at on the context of the reality that, at this time, games replicate physical action better than anything else. Are deeper meanings, complex literary elements, and action-driven plots incompatible, or is there some chance for synthesis of these ideas? And lastly, even with all these literary buzzwords and high-art talk, how do we actually do these things?

Running multiple times across the Game Developers Conference, this roundtable provides a great opportunity to dig deep into a handful of ideas, or broad spectrum of topics, depending on the make-up and inclinations of the attendees. The intention of the roundtable is to not only discuss these ideas on a theoretical level, but to also address practical considerations in presentation and execution. “Yes, but how do we *do* that?” is expected to be an often-asked question at the roundtables.

As with most roundtables, the takeaway here is food for thought and the opportunity to push boundaries and exchange ideas. Are we looking at the wrong paradigm for game structure? Can we weave deeper meaning into our run-and-gun content? Should we? With luck, these discussions will inform future game development decisions, or at the very least provide some fodder for the next round of beers.

——————–

Middle October is when the submittors find out if they’ve made it to Round Two.

(c)2009 Tom Dowd. All Rights Reserved.

Read Full Post »