63

Personally I prefer games with the test part. You should be able to fail. That’s what makes winning worthwhile in the first place.

3 Likes
64

That happened to me in the games of Delight games, after the first time you make the wrong choice and die miserably you learn that your choices really matter, a lot, though not to despise those games, I liked them, but they are more like choose the right path or die instead of choose your own adventure, the added difficulty makes them special in another way that most of the CoG/HG don’t have. And I’m not criticizing any of them, they are two different flavors of the same candy.
Obviously “fail” shouldn’t always mean “die”, you can fail and have consequences that you’ll have to carry along the rest of the game, like in real life if I could tell, but that is what makes this kind of games branch like crazy, so a balance between the two, consequences and the possibility of abrupt ends that make you think twice before make a choice, are what I think could accomplish a nice all around IF (though depending on the genre, plot and a lot of other things sometimes you don’t really need to add abrupt ending scenes, no extreme is good).

4 Likes
65

Ohhh!! I know exactly what you’re talking about, Eiwynn! I’ve been scouring the forums for that comment and haven’t been able to find it anywhere. :confused:

Anyway, I recall that the company’s biggest sellers have been within that genre of sci-fi/fantasy and also zombies, though I believe that has waned in recent years. And these even holds true to Hosted Games. I don’t think anyone has given exact numbers, but I would not be surprised if Fallen Hero is up there as one of the best selling HGs of all time. Certainly it’s one of the biggest of the last few years.

I’ve noticed that one of the most fondly remembered games on the forum is the Affairs of the Court series. Granted, the MC of that game had magical powers, but powers served more as a plot point/obstacle to overcome (in the way that society wss structured with these powers) rather than one to specifically engender a sense of power as is expected for sci-fi/fantasy games. Instead, the empowering aspect for players comes from the political scheming.

Similarly, A Study in Steampunk has a protagonist who can completely forego utilizing their “superpower” altogether in the whole game. There is precisely one (one-and-a-half if you really want to get into it) branch that leads to the player using their powers at all, and if I’m being quite honest, the narrative momentum of the game doesn’t usually favor that choice to begin with, and anyway that branch doesn’t appear until 4/5ths of the way through the game. Prior to that, the MC relies on nothing but their intellect, charisma, or physicality, none of which are even remotely superhuman.

Oh, I’m actually very glad I brought up ASiS, because…

A Study in Steampunk is one of those rare games where the question of religion is a huge aspect of the game! In fact, the superpower branch I mentioned earlier specifically has the MC join the clergy! And there had been plenty of opportunities beforehand where the MC’s opinion on the church could not only be expressed, but has an affect on your stats and therefore how certain characters come to see or trust you.

I think ASiS also serves as a wonderful example as to why religion is rarely brought up in games: because religion and faith are not mere customization options, nor should they be seen as another avenue with which to portray diversity. Faith is a lens through which someone perceives their world. It is constantly evolving in reaction to events in one’s life, and becomes intimately different to each person as a result. This level of fluidity and uniqueness can be extremely difficult to portray adequately in a game without seeming like you’re simply paying lip service to the idea of religion/faith.

This is why most writers just…don’t include religion, or at least not dynamic versions of it in games. When religion does pop up in IF, it’s generally restricted to fake religions that serve the stats and story more than actually serve as a lens for the character. They may have taken inspiration from real religions, but they’re distinct enough that if the author’s portrayal isn’t ideal—and they rarely do reflect the fluidity I mentioned earlier—it can’t offend anyone! :smiley:

Anyway, I just have a deepset fascination with religion, faith, and mythologies, and by extension their portrayal (or lack thereof) in interactive fiction. :eyes:

13 Likes
66

It’s a long thread, and I’m late on the ball, so excuse me if I repeat anything.

First of all, welcome fellow swede! I’m also from the ttrpg background so I see where you’re coming from, I had many of these thoughts at the start as well!

So here’s my take, very much abbreviated:

You are NOT overthinking it. I know people probably say that you are, but getting to know the water before you jump in head first is a smart choice, I did the same.

That being said, I think you are focusing too much on the things that feel awkward to you, and that’s a bad way to start writing. There’s no single answer here, there are very varying stories with very varying takes. Some sell well. Some don’t. A lot deserve to sell more, but are overlooked.

What you need to focus on are what you feel your strengths are. To borrow some language here, you’re the GM, you pick the system and the campaign. That being said, you might want to think about your players too. I was very cynical in my choices when I started writing Fallen Hero: Rebirth, and I’m actually going to walk through them because I feel like that explains my thoughts on what you brought up the best.

  1. I had many ideas, I picked a superhero story because it was popular at the time.

  2. I had originally planned to write it in first person, but read the CoG guidelines and decided to try second person, and grew to love it. It becomes a different story, and I am using it to drag the reader into the mc’s mindset which has led to a lot of fun things. Third person could work as well, what you pick depends on your story and style.

  3. I don’t care about looks or race or things like that, but decided to include it because it was very little coding but had great payoff for people that do care what their character looks like. It’s mostly only referenced on the character sheet. I avoided religion because I am a swede and don’t understand it.

  4. Gender grew to be a LOT more important than I had planned, but the story is all the better for it. Had I written a different story, it might have been a non-issue like looks or race above.

  5. I have two gender flippable npc’s, and especially in once case there’s only like three or four sentences where it makes a difference, and yet my readers decided the male and female version had entirely different personalities. It’s really illuminating how the same traits and dialog can be read as very different depending on the speaker.

  6. I have locked a LOT of things about the mc since that is the core of the story. The background, motivations, personality, style of speaking, age, previous relationship and much more. I allow people to modify details of it (are you past friends or did you flirt?) but just like @MultipleChoice I have a story to tell, and that needs a single main character.

  7. To my surprise, people have made very different mc’s within these constraints anyway. Good for them!

  8. I had a lot of things I thought I should have in the game when I started writing, but I cut them out because I didn’t need them. (like an inventory system)

  9. There are writing choices I have made that I have got a lot of flack over, for example the fact that I don’t tell the reader everything, it’s a four book mystery, live with it. Or the fact that the main character is a villain and does a lot of morally skeevy things (funny how it’s never murder that gets to people).

Oh boy, I lied about abbreviated, didn’t I?

My advice to you would be to focus on the story you want to tell. That’s the most important thing, if it’s good it will survive even a gender lock (read “A Study in Steampunk” for a good fixed gender story). Be aware it will turn some players off though.

When it comes to other inclusive things that makes you hesitate, take a moment to think about why. For example, is your issue with race that you don’t know how to deal with it well? (I don’t, I’m a pasty ass swede). Then maybe just a nod and a line on the character sheet is enough that at least the reader will get the satisfaction of knowing that their character is not another white brown-haired dude with stubble. If the issue is a setting where it would be weird, think about that would be? Bones might be white, but history wasn’t, not even medieval europe or vikings. If the issue is a fantasy setting, well, then you are in charge so you are making that issue, aren’t you? I’m not saying that you have to, some of my fave stories don’t include race at all (Samurai of Hyuga is fantasy Japan for example), I’m just using it an example that knowing why you include/exclude stuff is important.

You don’t need to change the game just because the character changes race or gender, you don’t even have to change any dialog unless you’re feeling ambitious. Even a half-assed inclusion is a lot different than locking people out. I think that’s where a lot of writers start having problems, because we start thinking about Chekov’s gun, that if we mention gender or race we have to use it in a big part of the story.

We don’t. It’s like that section of the character sheet where you can draw a picture of your character, you don’t have to do it. It won’t affect the game. It’s just a fun detail that matters a lot to some people, while others just draw a stick figure or paste in a beer commercial ad.

This is getting long, as usual, so I’ll just wrap it up with this:

You don’t have to write anything you don’t want. You don’t need to understand US sensibilities (I sure don’t). Just keep an open mind and remember to have fun, and no matter what you do, someone’s gonna hate it.

The trick is getting enough people to love it that you stop caring.

(now if you want to maximize sales, that’s another story)

EDIT: I almost forgot. Romance isn’t necessary, but character interaction certainly is, and what is a good romance other than friendship with kisses?

34 Likes
67

i think this is really important and I like the idea of expressing it as “nexus points” where choices are relevant at a certain point, but after that they fade into the background, and I can see why you reference Cataphrak because ive seen the same thing in their infinity games. Actions → consequences → wider consequences → new actions seems like a good way to do it. This 100% does not need to be “branching” in the crude sense, it just requires variable tracking through the game.

This requires mechanical planning - how are you going to keep track of these things - I am currently working on a chapter of my game where I have 300 odd temp variables, in addition to the near 1000 global ones. I have developed massively as a game-developer while doing this, but the legacy of starting out not knowing what I was doing rest in thousands and thousands of badly written and confusing lines of code and poorly named variables. But It is possible, and it is very satisfying to read, to enjoy and to play - and I find it one of the most enjoyable parts of game-development. I have seen people say that this sort of stuff takes lots of time but there are ways to streamline it and Zombie Exodus:SH is proof that it can be done and very well.

It also requires story-planning, and I think this is really really hard, because on top of the mechanical stuff you also have to be an author with ideas (tough gig.)

On the subject of test choice mechanics I have seen lots of different ways to do it.

  1. Pick choice if stat X is above threshold Y you succeed, else you fail. - this is the hallmark of 4-point trap style questions. and furthermore it results in really frustrating situations where you think you should be able to pass a test then you chose it and “oh no u fail”.
  2. A variation on the above which I prefer, when you pick a choice and regardless of whether you fail or not stat X will increased, representing “experience” - Lucid does this a lot.
  3. A variation on the above where success is graduated : fail, slight fail, slight success, great success - this gets around the trap of picking a choice and failing catastrophically because you had 64 and you needed 65.
  4. Another way to get around picking choices and failing is to have the ability to pick the choice in the first place gated by your ability (*selectable_if style). Lucid does this a lot where you might have 5 choices, the ability to select the first 4 are contingent on your stats, the fitfth is the “no suitable skills” choice which might result in failiure or might result in health loss. I like this because no one wants to pick a choice for something they think they should be able to do then fail.
  5. A bit left-field but what I do in my game, and I have seen in Breack:TAJ is the more tabletop rpg-mechanics style choice where your stat determines you chance of success: e.g stat at 70 therefor chance of success is 70%. I have seen very few games that do this expect the one mentioned above.

I’m sure there are many others but I think that it is quite possible to avoid the traps of 1. above. anyway i have written enough but i really like this thread <3

7 Likes
68

Sincerely, If I had to use anything of that deep mechanics to make games and write in general, I would never write anything at all and probably 99,9% of games will never be made in the first place.
I really think this is art, not Mathematics or deep philosophy.

Edit However, It is true I am not a published writer and I will never be and not being a mathematics-based author could be a reason why my games are flawed

2 Likes
69

It is art, but some of us just thinks it’s fun to try to deconstruct and find patterns. There’s no single right way to write a game.

And honestly? The mechanics for me is maybe 20% of the game, as long as they don’t actively hinder my playthrough, the story is far more important.

What’s flawed to one person might not be to the next, what’s important is trying your best to make the kind of story you want to tell to the best or your ability.

You really don’t need a single stat for that…

7 Likes
70

I feel stupid in these types of threads because everyone starts talking about deep stuff and mathematics. And I feel really stupid because I don’t see writing as mathematics and deep stuff. For me are creativity, imagination and emotions.

5 Likes
71

I get it. A lot of my decisions are just ‘because I felt like it’, and a lot of my numbers for stats and the like are just ‘it felt right’. It’s like when people are starting to talk about arrays and coding and I go -surprised pikachu face- and doesn’t understand a thing.

But I come from a wargaming/game designing background where a lot of the job is making clear exactly how things are supposed to work, and how to convey that to the players, so that bleeds over in discussions like this.

Ironically enough I use very little of that when writing, I really admire things like the Zombie Exodus, or the Infinity series where it really seems like they have their numbers together.

We all feel stupid now and then, I know I do on a regular basis.

6 Likes
72

You are one of my favorite writers here :hugs: you are awesome.

3 Likes
73

We all been through there I guess, at the beginning I didn’t knew how to put 2 commands together, but failing with enough motivation to still want to do it takes you to learn sooner or later.
You can still make a hell of a great game with 90% deep stuffs and 10% code, but I don’t think you can do one with 90% code and 10% deep stuff… (normal books have no code and some of them are awesome)

74

No, I know to code. My problem is deeper. I don’t understand seen games as mathematics puzzles.
For me, games are Art, made to create an emotional sensation in the reader All has to be at the service of the plot to give the best experience possible to the reader. Showing a beautiful piece that is the core of what as a writer do you want create

75

I think a lot is in the language we use to talk about things and how we learn. For example, I learned grammar and language by reading, and that probably shows. Some people learn grammar in school and actually remembers the rules, and that’s good for them. Neither approach is wrong, it’s just a different mindset with slightly different results.

Talking about things like the four point trap, or how to formulate valid choices really comes down to one thing only: to make the reader feel like they are part of the story, and that their choices matter. It’s a way to try to make a language to talk about those moments that makes you go “wtf, this is stupid” or “I can’t play the game I want to” without just using value judgement.

A lot of people have problems expressing what the issue is, and if you point out things like “if you don’t always pick the choice that goes with your highest stat, the game punishes you” it’s easier for some to understand than a more vague “you must play a certain way to win”.

One of the biggest problems with interactive fiction, is to realize that people might want to play other things than the character you wrote in your head, and how much you can/should allow them to do so. Figuring out how to phrase/balance choices in a mechanical way is how some people approach this problem. Finding the frame to put around the artwork you’re making.

It’s just a different way to talk about the same problem: How to write a good and engaging story that makes people feel included and satisfied at the end.

12 Likes
76

I have found that having a good system can really help with the writing part of writing a game - I don’t know if you have this but the planning that goes into stats rewards me later by helping to guide what I actually write. Without this I don’t think I could have done as much as I have. I think what I am saying is it helps me with creative block when it comes to writing choices, allowing me to focus on the story rather than struggling to come up with player actions.

2 Likes
77

Wow, thanks to the OP and all of the commenters because this has definitely become one of the most thought-provoking and enjoyable threads I’ve read on this forum so far.

I spent the last two days digging into the deep history of IF, including watching “Get Lamp” (the documentary) and reading the IF Theory Reader, among other texts.

I guess what I find the most fascinating is that one could draw a Venn diagram where one circle was “Fiction/Literature elements” and the other was “Game Mechanics.” In terms of personal preferences, some players would have barely contiguous circles while others would have both circles perfectly overlapping.

In the “Old School” IF, the only real game mechanics available were

  1. Making it to the end without dying, and
  2. Solving puzzles to get a key so that you can keep moving forward to the end.

The rest was just purely navigational, such as mapping or successfully exiting out of the dreaded mazes.

Fast forward to today, and with something like CS, you’ve got the possibility of using literally thousands of variables to determine gameplay. But at the end of the day, these variables are just “keys” in disguise. Either it’s a single-use “key” that you must own to pass through a “door” or else it’s a stat of a sufficiently high level (the “key”) to activate a scene.

Therefore, while the game mechanics aspect is much more complex, it’s actually nothing new. And I think someone coming in from traditional RPGs would feel perfectly at home. What IS new to IF, however, is the level of customization available for the fiction element, and I think that’s what triggered the OP’s post.

I think that the biggest hurdle I had to overcome when getting used to CS games is the switch in narrative voice. For many CS games, the story starts by asking the player certain questions (such as gender preference, but it could be anything) and then switches to just telling the player what’s going on.

In other words, a story might ask me my name but then it tells me that I AM a pirate aboard a ship. I can choose my name, but I certainly didn’t get consulted about my preferences for job occupation, so it’s a bit disconcerting.

And with CS being limited to just two text formatting options (bold and italic), it’s pretty difficult to visually signify the switch between when I’m going to be consulted and when I’m going to be dictated to.

It’s even more confusing when I can sometimes input free text (i.e. no restrictions on choice) and then sometimes I’m limited to two or three options to click on at the bottom of the screen, none of which may correspond to what I’d ACTUALLY like to do.

In other words, in a parser game, there’s freeform input from the player throughout, so the game feels very interactive. Whereas a CYOA game could be purely “choose one of the pre-scripted answers” on every page, which feels less interactive and more like traditional “fiction.”

But if I’m being consulted sometimes and dictated to at other times, it’s really hard to get into the swing of the story and suspend my disbelief. I think that’s really what’s at the heart of my animus against customization. It’s not the user value being customized (i.e. gender, sex, hair color, etc) but that the process of customization itself disrupts the narrative flow.

1 Like
78

You know, it occurred to me that a properly customized (inclusive) game for CS would read something like an extended Mad Lib.

Which, if given enough variables and properly crafted, would be an extraordinarily fun experience :grinning:

79

The one thing I would add to that is that, for my money, a well-written CS game will have a special, different door, the lock of which is opened by not having the key you mentioned.

4 Likes
80

Exactly; mechanics are much more than stat variables. Structure and use are not always a binary check and not always pure numeric.

3 Likes
81

There are many games that do this, but there are others that allow variation to one degree or another as well.

@Havenstone’s game, XoR is an example. XoR is multifaceted in the way you are allowed the flexibility to shape your origins.

Yet, that is not the only game-changer.

You enter the game’s inciting incident as a loyalist, of one degree or another and end up becoming a rebel. Yet, here I am saying that XoR limits your “occupation” to that of being a rebel, so how can I make the claim that XoR is any different from your hypothetical pirate game?

In execution of the plot, Havenstone allows your protagonist to redefine themselves. In the rising action portion of the game, you as the rebel, get to define exactly what that means. Will you be a religious zealot? A political loyalist to your culture? Perhaps you (or @poison_mara) will attempt to be a rebel with only a mule for a trusted associate?

In @Gower’s games, the customization never distrupts the flow of the narration – perhaps that is because of his writing related background, but in my humble opinion it is because of more than that.

Gower takes the mechanics he uses, both the defined variable types you reference and also the structure of designing elements left undefined to execute a flowing story from the opening act until the resolution.

An example of this can be seen in Tally Ho!, where boat race is implemented. He did exactly what he references in his post… he provides both wins and defeats by not having the key to unlock doors.

I can point out other games that challenge your construction of game structure, but I will leave off by saying that I hope more author/designers will challenge this way of viewing IF in making their games.

6 Likes
82

Me and Mr Pumpkins Forever!!

2 Likes