Sunday, May 19, 2024

3 Insights into Procedurally Generated Narrative

As a book, Procedural Storytelling in Game Design has not quite been what I expected. The marketing material declares that “The reader will learn to construct narrative systems, write procedural dialog, and generate compelling characters with unique personalities and backstories,” and that has not exactly been my experience. 

It’s never smart to believe marketing material, but this reads more like a collection of essays?

That’s fine — the essays are written by smart people! — but it’s not a step-by-step instruction manual. Each essay has its own perspective, and they don’t always fit neatly together for a clean set of best practices.

I still copied down some ideas to swipe for later.

I. The Bare Minimum.

In Chapter 3, “Generated Right in the Feels,” Veteran game designer Jill Murray (“best known for her work on Shadow of the Tomb Raider, The Big Con, and a handful of Assassin’s Creed games”) writes about her experiments trying to identify the smallest, sparsest, most sketchy set of details that could make characters seem relatable. “We know that players have a great natural capacity and enthusiasm for attachment and interpretation. Why not provoke them to use it on purpose and shift some of the processing power to the players’ minds, so to speak.”

Murray tested this idea by developing a character generator that created sets of descriptive details. It turned out that providing too many details distracted people from the character by encouraging them to play around with the generator. “A sparse level of detail was more likely to tap into players’ creative minds and provoke them to consider the person behind the list.” 

II. Clever Combinations.

In Chapter 8, “Curated Narrative in Duskers,” Tim Keenan and Benjamin Hill (the creators of Duskers) discuss how identical story components can create different narratives when they’re encountered in different orders. They gave an example with a dead rat and two discussions of how it got there: maintenance technicians explaining that dead rats are found on spaceships all the time, and scientists talking about how it could be a sign that something is seriously wrong.

Test audiences read both perspectives, and “most of those who read the scientist’s email first generally felt the scientist was on to something and the operators were being obtuse, while most of those who read the operator’s conversation first were more likely to think the scientist was overreacting.” Using this insight, they broke their game’s stories into a series of small ship logs from different points of view, allowing players to experience the narrative differently and encouraging them to draw varied conclusions.

III. Planned Absences

In Chapter 18, “Dirty Procedural Narrative in We Happy Few,” Alex Epstein (narrative director for We Happy Few) discusses the challenge of telling stories in a procedural sandbox. He relies on the fact that people will eagerly assemble their own stories from a set of disjointed facts, approaching procedural storytelling with what he calls “dirty narrative.” Epstein says that while good dirty narrative stories have the same elements as every good story, “what distinguishes them is that, instead of trying to make as clear as possible what happened to whom, where, when and how, they intentionally demand interpretation.”

Epstein goes on to explain how dirty narrative can use lies, absences, mysteries, inconsistencies, and tangents to outline negative space around a story that the audience fills in themselves. “All dirty narrative could be boiled down to ‘something should be there but isn’t’ and ‘something’s there that shouldn’t be.’” However, he also warns that dirty narrative is “execution dependent” (i.e., something that will be awful if poorly implemented).

I might have chosen these points selectively to support my own biases (Dear God, these essays make so many points), but it seems like good procedural narrative ends up being willfully incomplete. When a system creates a single, definitive story that has no room for interpretation, it’s tougher to engage with.  

Image credit: wilderjjss / Pixabay

No comments:

Post a Comment