Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
quote:
Original post by Nazrix I am wondering if anyone has a solution to the one obvous problem:
If we''re dealing w/ a totally non-linear (where there''s reactive events), single-player game, how does the game end?
Did you see the Endless Story ? I think that should answer that question, if you actually created a game that doesn''t finish, you probably would have found the Grail of story telling, and I suppose the Bane of the marketing guys next door ...
youpla :-P
-----------------------------Sancte Isidore ora pro nobis !
You cannot have a story without an ending. You can have an ongoing series of events, but a story is carried by a moral or theme, and in order for that to serve any purpose, you must have a conclusion and resolution.
This is still a game we''re talking about, and the number of ways in which the player can interact with the environment is limited. The only problem with this is the Tree of Death. When the amount of diverging pathways become unmanageable, the whole game suffers.
One variable is time. Whenever something major or minor occurs, it will change the results of different actions initiated by the player. This is so weird. A month ago, I was claiming that this could never be done! Sigh.
=====Are you aware that the people who bring you television actually refer to it openly as "programming?"
quote:
Original post by Freakshow A month ago, I was claiming that this could never be done! Sigh.
hehe...I wasn't sure if you were who you were until you mentioned that. I thought this was one subject of which you couldn't see both sides, but I'm glad that's incorrect
We really can't have a never-ending story unless computers can think for themselves, and I think that there would be better applications for that kind of technology than games...and we wouldn't have to create games anymore then.
"The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." --William Blake
"The road of excess also just ends up making me tired because I'm too lazy" --Nazrix
Edited by - Nazrix on July 22, 2000 10:23:52 PM
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself. "Just don't look at the hole." -- Unspoken_Magi
How about this. The writers create a base for the story. They create the plot, create a bunch of characters, define how they interact with each other, etc. Then the game starts.
The player can just stand there, and watch the story unfold before his eyes. The minute he decides to interact with one of the characters, he starts building his own story. This way any NPC can potentially affect the story as much as the player. This type of game would be very interesting to play, and at the same time very hard to design and even more hard to implement.
Ok, just to get a couple things straight in my own head, and reiterate some from the linear/non-linear discussion: (BTW, I was wondering where everyone from there went to! I''ve been posting there since last night, talking to myself I guess)
Linear v. Non-linear is on a continuum. On the non-linear side is real-life (or so we suppose; what if we are *Fated* to develop non-linear games? urp!) and on the linear side is something like a book. Or, non-linear=oral tradition (taken as a whole), linear=the Christian Bible today. So we are looking to take video games, already more non-linear than any present day medium, and make them more non-linear. For the sake of discussion, we''ve been talking about an "ideal" non-linear game.
Linear art follows a line. (no, really?) Non-linear art branches. All art/life is linear in retrospect. The only time we enter non-linearity is at the moment of creation? Therefore, the line between the creator and viewer is blurred, even dissolved. . .we enter into participatory, communal art. . .
I know I''m not bringing anything new to the table here, but I think I''ll stop right now anyway, cause it kinda hits you to say it outright. . .
Yeah, Nazrix, maybe another story. Just continue the "story" past the end with an add-on or something. Or, if the world is dynamic enough, it will react to the story that just ended, and make a new one. People will never look at the hero the same way again, so why not play through that. Course, you could be stuck with an open-ended game like Daggerfall, and that may or may not be a bad thing. I suppose it depends on the game, and what you offer the player besides the story.
------------------------------------------- "What's the story with your face, son?!?"
-------------------------------------------The Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still.Exodus 14:14
Pacman: Yeah, I was thinking if there's going to be another story there, then why not let the player choose which one to go through. Then if you're going to go that far, you can add a few extra stories, and then there's a less linear game created.
Unless, of course, one story builds upon a previous one.
"The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." --William Blake
"The road of excess also just ends up making me tired because I'm too lazy" --Nazrix
Edited by - Nazrix on July 25, 2000 12:54:34 AM
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself. "Just don't look at the hole." -- Unspoken_Magi
