"Game design begins with an idea for a story"
not sucessful game design. The vast majority of good games do NOT begin with an idea for the story. Right now I have a great idea for a game. There is no story and I don''t even have the setting chosen (fantasy/scifi/reality). However I am starting to design it. I will not bother with anything besides design until the design is done. Then I (with some help) will do the programming/art/story/sound and so on, simultaneously with each other but after the design. I guess either you understand or you don''t.
🎉 Celebrating 25 Years of GameDev.net! 🎉
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!
Game Writing and Game Design - Whats the diff?
And the last few posts show where the strain is.
I believe that good games _do_ start from good stories. For example:
Monkey Island
Fallout
System Shock
Outcast
Ultima
Grim Fandango
and so on. Why? Because they are original. They hold more emotional impact as well. I just can''t get all that excited about the next iteration of something that''s already out there. To me, all of the games below are basically the same:
Wolf 3D --> Doom --> Quake --> Heretic --> Hexen --> Quake II --> Unreal --> Half Life --> Sin --> Blood --> etcetcetc
Every now and then there''s a semi-groundbreaking idea (Tribes with its team play, for instance), but mostly, they''re trying to sell me a slightly better version of something I''ve already done. Ok, so this time I''m going to shoot some guys who are a little bit higher resolution, or maybe this time, I have a bazooka with special lighting effects. Whoopee. And there''s only the slightest indication of why I wanna shoot everyone to begin with. And RTS''s? Played just about all of ''em, don''t get me started.
But a game that really puts me in a setting, so that I feel I understand who I am and why I need to do what I''m doing, that captures my imagination.
The point of this post is that many (most?) of you think I''ve got it backwards:
Me: Story, then engine/gameplay
Most other people: Engine, then a reason for the engine to exist.
Now, there''s a place where I can go to talk stories. Of course, you''ll still find me talking about everything else, because I love all of this stuff. But you can see how I''d like to go to a subset of the boards to discuss ways to break out of the same old games.
- gollumgollum
I believe that good games _do_ start from good stories. For example:
Monkey Island
Fallout
System Shock
Outcast
Ultima
Grim Fandango
and so on. Why? Because they are original. They hold more emotional impact as well. I just can''t get all that excited about the next iteration of something that''s already out there. To me, all of the games below are basically the same:
Wolf 3D --> Doom --> Quake --> Heretic --> Hexen --> Quake II --> Unreal --> Half Life --> Sin --> Blood --> etcetcetc
Every now and then there''s a semi-groundbreaking idea (Tribes with its team play, for instance), but mostly, they''re trying to sell me a slightly better version of something I''ve already done. Ok, so this time I''m going to shoot some guys who are a little bit higher resolution, or maybe this time, I have a bazooka with special lighting effects. Whoopee. And there''s only the slightest indication of why I wanna shoot everyone to begin with. And RTS''s? Played just about all of ''em, don''t get me started.
But a game that really puts me in a setting, so that I feel I understand who I am and why I need to do what I''m doing, that captures my imagination.
The point of this post is that many (most?) of you think I''ve got it backwards:
Me: Story, then engine/gameplay
Most other people: Engine, then a reason for the engine to exist.
Now, there''s a place where I can go to talk stories. Of course, you''ll still find me talking about everything else, because I love all of this stuff. But you can see how I''d like to go to a subset of the boards to discuss ways to break out of the same old games.
- gollumgollum
Author
quote: Original post by Wavinator
I've got an idea: There are these falling blocks that land at the bottom of the screen. Every time the form a row, the row disappears and whatever is on top falls down 1 level. You can move the blocks left and right as they fall, and rotate them as they fall. If you place them right, they'll form a row. Oh, and the rate the blocks fall will go faster and faster.
Mr. Writer, what should my story be for this?
When you're done with that one, btw, I've got another idea for this card game, oh, and this game where you click around in a mine field... those'll need stories too, right?
--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
Using your logic, we don't need writers at all. Thank god people stopped doing RPGs, FPS, strategy games, and adventure games. They were just a waste. I am happy to see the industry is only turning out puzzle games.
BTW, you are killing bricks
Edited by - Whirlwind on September 22, 2000 4:42:22 PM
"I believe that good games _do_ start from good stories. For example:
Monkey Island
Fallout
System Shock
Outcast
Ultima
Grim Fandango"
Are you certain that design was based on the story? Can you prove it? Maybe for some of those games but chances are that the design came first. Ok Grim Fandango, I''ve played some of that, here''s my summary of the design:
the player clicks on stuff. Sometimes he aquires objects which he can use to click on other stuff. Sometimes he talks to people and gets into a tree where he can learn information and propel the game. Other than clicking he can walk around. Certain areas are blocked until later in the game. There are no player statistics other than items so no resolution system is required, all actions are automatically sucessful. The concept of puzzles and the way they are implemented is also part of the design.
I might have left some stuff out but that''s basically all there is to the design. The design does not include plot in any way. Now looking at the above design couldn''t it be used on other games, perhaps king''s quest? KQ came out earlier so the design was already done. I''m sure there were many other games of that style in the past too. Thus the design was NOT based on the story. The design was already done thus it is IMPOSSIBLE that the story came first. Well maybe there is one exception: they could have come up with the story and then slapped on a design. However I don''t think that story would have worked that well as a first person shooter. It is quite apparent that they made that story with the intent that it would be an adventure style game.
Ok the other games, I''m not that familiar with the Ultima series so I could be wrong here. Did any two consecutive Ultima games use rules that were similar? I''m guessing that they did. Were their stories the same though? I''m guessing not. Thus the story did not dictate the design.
Ok fictitious example: ultima 13 uses a particular combat system with to hit roles that count only dodging and shields. Armor reduces damage. The story is you have to do a whole bunch of stuff and then kill a big boss. Now ultima 14 uses the same combat system but has a different story: you go somewhere else and do a whole bunch of stuff and then kill a different kind of boss. Now let''s assume that both stories are well written. Shouldn''t the combat system be different? After all if design is based on the story the two systems would have to be different. However that is obviously not true. Game mechanics are not based on stories.
I''m tired of arguing. Anyone who thinks for a moment that game rules and game story are related is almost certainly making bad game rules.
Monkey Island
Fallout
System Shock
Outcast
Ultima
Grim Fandango"
Are you certain that design was based on the story? Can you prove it? Maybe for some of those games but chances are that the design came first. Ok Grim Fandango, I''ve played some of that, here''s my summary of the design:
the player clicks on stuff. Sometimes he aquires objects which he can use to click on other stuff. Sometimes he talks to people and gets into a tree where he can learn information and propel the game. Other than clicking he can walk around. Certain areas are blocked until later in the game. There are no player statistics other than items so no resolution system is required, all actions are automatically sucessful. The concept of puzzles and the way they are implemented is also part of the design.
I might have left some stuff out but that''s basically all there is to the design. The design does not include plot in any way. Now looking at the above design couldn''t it be used on other games, perhaps king''s quest? KQ came out earlier so the design was already done. I''m sure there were many other games of that style in the past too. Thus the design was NOT based on the story. The design was already done thus it is IMPOSSIBLE that the story came first. Well maybe there is one exception: they could have come up with the story and then slapped on a design. However I don''t think that story would have worked that well as a first person shooter. It is quite apparent that they made that story with the intent that it would be an adventure style game.
Ok the other games, I''m not that familiar with the Ultima series so I could be wrong here. Did any two consecutive Ultima games use rules that were similar? I''m guessing that they did. Were their stories the same though? I''m guessing not. Thus the story did not dictate the design.
Ok fictitious example: ultima 13 uses a particular combat system with to hit roles that count only dodging and shields. Armor reduces damage. The story is you have to do a whole bunch of stuff and then kill a big boss. Now ultima 14 uses the same combat system but has a different story: you go somewhere else and do a whole bunch of stuff and then kill a different kind of boss. Now let''s assume that both stories are well written. Shouldn''t the combat system be different? After all if design is based on the story the two systems would have to be different. However that is obviously not true. Game mechanics are not based on stories.
I''m tired of arguing. Anyone who thinks for a moment that game rules and game story are related is almost certainly making bad game rules.
Whirlwind,
First off, I just reread my post and realized the tone was a hell of a lot more sarcastic than I intended. I forgot the smiley!
Urggghhh?!?!? How so? I was just trying to "rib" you by pointing out that there are games that don''t require writers. In stating their case that writers are the Rodney Dangerfield of the game industry ("No Respect! No Respect!") ppl. sometimes can go waaaaay overboard. They then come off sounding like any game without a story is crap. This is an emotional argument that weakens their case because it''s so obviously untrue (better they should say, "I don''t like games without story" and look a lot smarter)
There are __SOME__ games that __DO__ require a writer! Most RPG stories would suck (errr... most do anyway, but you get my drift). Writers can make kicka$$ backstory, great dialog, excellent description, and cool manuals. Not saying they''re not needed by __ANY__ game, I''m saying they''re not needed by __ALL__ games.
Uh oh, I can see it now: "End Brick Genocide!!!!" (Don''t tell Landfish!)
--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
First off, I just reread my post and realized the tone was a hell of a lot more sarcastic than I intended. I forgot the smiley!
quote: Original post by Whirlwind
Using your logic, we don''t need writers at all.
Urggghhh?!?!? How so? I was just trying to "rib" you by pointing out that there are games that don''t require writers. In stating their case that writers are the Rodney Dangerfield of the game industry ("No Respect! No Respect!") ppl. sometimes can go waaaaay overboard. They then come off sounding like any game without a story is crap. This is an emotional argument that weakens their case because it''s so obviously untrue (better they should say, "I don''t like games without story" and look a lot smarter)
There are __SOME__ games that __DO__ require a writer! Most RPG stories would suck (errr... most do anyway, but you get my drift). Writers can make kicka$$ backstory, great dialog, excellent description, and cool manuals. Not saying they''re not needed by __ANY__ game, I''m saying they''re not needed by __ALL__ games.
quote:
BTW, you are killing bricks
Uh oh, I can see it now: "End Brick Genocide!!!!" (Don''t tell Landfish!
)--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster
I''m tired of arguing. Anyone who thinks for a moment that game rules and game story are related is almost certainly making bad game rules.
Hmmmm... I actually agreed with most of what you''re saying up to this last point. Let''s say that the story for U13 involved you being a Goblin mass murderer. No problem here, any standard fantasy combat system would work.
Now say the story was so great people are raving about it. They want to know what happened to Iolo''s illegitimate love child, and how the game''s going to work now that the Guardian''s Momma has turned you into a faith healer.
You''ll need to design a different game system for this, right? This is game design being influenced by story.
Now I''m of the mind that when story interferes with design, story should usually be subordinate. "No, the avatar can''t faith heal because it doesn''t work as a game mechanic. Plus the revival tent costs too many polys." Ok, it might have been a good plotline, but the now story has to change.
The two can influence each other heavily, is all I''m saying. Two different sides of the same coin.
--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
This sounds a hell of a lot like landfish a while ago when we were having the same argument. People just stop listening when we are talking about things they don''t want to hear.
1. Monkey Island was built on top of the SCUMM engine. That engine existed before the story of Monkey Island. Monkey Island''s story was written within the confines of the system. It worked quite well because they never went too far out of bounds.
2. I do not consider the Ultimas great games, ESPECIALLY not Ultima VIII, but that''s personal opinion. Some people attach a lot of importance to the story in a game. However, it is still a FACT that gameplay comes before story in a GAME.... it''s not a book. If you prefer games with great stories, kudos to you.
I prefer great games with mediocre stories, to mediocre games with great stories - that''s my take.
Yours may be different.
It does not change reality though.
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
1. Monkey Island was built on top of the SCUMM engine. That engine existed before the story of Monkey Island. Monkey Island''s story was written within the confines of the system. It worked quite well because they never went too far out of bounds.
2. I do not consider the Ultimas great games, ESPECIALLY not Ultima VIII, but that''s personal opinion. Some people attach a lot of importance to the story in a game. However, it is still a FACT that gameplay comes before story in a GAME.... it''s not a book. If you prefer games with great stories, kudos to you.
I prefer great games with mediocre stories, to mediocre games with great stories - that''s my take.
Yours may be different.
It does not change reality though.
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ok yeah story can influence design sometimes, often in in small ways. I guess I just meant as a rule you should design then write, design then code, and design then draw. Yeah anything can influence anything else. Art can influence how you code and vice versa. I just don''t think that writing has any special influence over design. If anything writing probably has the most influence over the art.
Author
Game engines still do not restrict game design elements to a set template. I''d use quake as an example, but all FPS look the same recently. I played Moytr all the way through, and thought this had might as well be any other FPS. Sadly, too many people want to used a canned engine and end up with a canned game. They forget all about story. I have to admit that after Doom, the rest of the FPS games just added pretty graphics and ditched the intense atmosphere. Doom had a skimpy story, which basically set map set design. Quake, well, never played it all the way through - it was such a bore due to its really bad pacing.
Anyways, you can do game design without story, but the game will really suck due to no innovation. You can do game design with story but the quality of the resulting game will depend on how close the game designer weaves his story in. No matter how shallow the story, it still affects game design from the outset.
I think a lot of people are getting confused as to what game design is - game design covers everything from the story, to the game flow to the game engine design (usually some poor software guru gets beaned in the head with writing that bit of code). On the top level, the game designer ties the look and feel of the interface, levels, and art to the over all goal of the story.
On the topic of interface being directly influenced by the mood of the story, does anyone have ''Tomorrow Never Dies'' on DVD? The interface to the DVD menu is so cool and relates so much to the look and feel that the movie itself had. If you are into James Bond, the menu is what you expect on a James Bond DVD. From the start, the movie''s interface sets you up and gets you ready to watch a James Bond movie. The menu was driven by the story with most of the menu look and feel being taken from devices and gadgets found in the movie. That is desing. They did it again with "The World is Not Enough", taking elements from the movie and working them into the menu and intro. Why in the heck can''t game desiners catch on? Use bits of your story on the main menu and intro.
I guess I am hard set in the beleif that game design and story are hoplessly stuck together. Some people have proven that they can sell games through name recognition and just put together a neat engine demo to sell. I am not going to name game names.
Anyways, you can do game design without story, but the game will really suck due to no innovation. You can do game design with story but the quality of the resulting game will depend on how close the game designer weaves his story in. No matter how shallow the story, it still affects game design from the outset.
I think a lot of people are getting confused as to what game design is - game design covers everything from the story, to the game flow to the game engine design (usually some poor software guru gets beaned in the head with writing that bit of code). On the top level, the game designer ties the look and feel of the interface, levels, and art to the over all goal of the story.
On the topic of interface being directly influenced by the mood of the story, does anyone have ''Tomorrow Never Dies'' on DVD? The interface to the DVD menu is so cool and relates so much to the look and feel that the movie itself had. If you are into James Bond, the menu is what you expect on a James Bond DVD. From the start, the movie''s interface sets you up and gets you ready to watch a James Bond movie. The menu was driven by the story with most of the menu look and feel being taken from devices and gadgets found in the movie. That is desing. They did it again with "The World is Not Enough", taking elements from the movie and working them into the menu and intro. Why in the heck can''t game desiners catch on? Use bits of your story on the main menu and intro.
I guess I am hard set in the beleif that game design and story are hoplessly stuck together. Some people have proven that they can sell games through name recognition and just put together a neat engine demo to sell. I am not going to name game names.
quote: Original post by Whirlwindahem, no. engine does not equal design. You could use a canned engine but a nice new design to come up with a nice new game. The thief series is a good example. They use a generic FPS engine to come up with a nice game. The story doesn''t seem to matter much but the game is still quite good. Even if one doesn''t like the game it would be impossible to say that it was just another FPS. The story has nothing to do with that fact.
Game engines still do not restrict game design elements to a set template. I''d use quake as an example, but all FPS look the same recently. I played Moytr all the way through, and thought this had might as well be any other FPS. Sadly, too many people want to used a canned engine and end up with a canned game.
quote:
Anyways, you can do game design without story, but the game will really suck due to no innovation.
now that''s just crazy talk. How many examples to we need to give? Time after time great game after great game has been made without story.
Ok here''s yet another example for you: I don''t like FPS games much at all. I''ve never played more than five minutes of Quake 1 or Quake 2. I bought Quake 3. It was not because of the story or the fancy graphics. It was because the design had been refined to the point where it was fun for me. The main change was making weapons respawn quickly enough that skilled players couldn''t take all the weapons, that combined with having a stronger starting weapon means that I usually get to shoot people a little before I die. That makes it a lot more fun for me. It sure wasn''t because the story got a whole lot better.
quote:
I think a lot of people are getting confused as to what game design is - game design covers everything from the story, to the game flow to the game engine design (usually some poor software guru gets beaned in the head with writing that bit of code). On the top level, the game designer ties the look and feel of the interface, levels, and art to the over all goal of the story.
no we are not confused. Game design does not cover everything from story to programming. It includes neither of those. Game design is something different as we have been trying to tell you.
On the topic of interface being directly influenced by the mood of the story, does anyone have ''Tomorrow Never Dies'' on DVD? The interface to the DVD menu is so cool and relates so much to the look and feel that the movie itself had. If you are into James Bond, the menu is what you expect on a James Bond DVD. From the start, the movie''s interface sets you up and gets you ready to watch a James Bond movie. The menu was driven by the story with most of the menu look and feel being taken from devices and gadgets found in the movie. That is desing.
ok now I see where you are coming from. You don''t mean game design, you mean artistic design, as in being a graphic designer or something like that. No that isn''t game design. The word design applies to a wide variety of professions but when we say game design we mean something different. When a game designer takes on the interface he''s trying to make it intuitive and simple as possible. Then he sends it over to the artist to pretty it up. For example a design improvement in RTS interfaces is being able to hit the space bar to go to the most recent event. A graphic design improvement is making the interface look a little different from race to race, though it does not affect gameplay in anyway.
quote:
I guess I am hard set in the beleif that game design and story are hoplessly stuck together. Some people have proven that they can sell games through name recognition and just put together a neat engine demo to sell. I am not going to name game names.
Name recognition???? Where do you think name recognition comes from in the first place? It generally comes from good gameplay. Ok so often a line will falter and die yet still continue to sell well but... ok and engine demo? Let''s look at Starcraft:
It is 640x480 fixed resolution. It uses only 256 colors! It is not in 3d. It sold very well. Was it on the engine? Absolutely not. At the time when it came out its engine was starting to get outdated. Did it have an amazing story? Well, personally I liked it a lot but I doubt many people bought it for the story. People bought it for the gameplay and they still buy it for the gameplay (it is still 9th on the PC data list, 2.5 years after release). It is still played a lot more than most recent games. That sure isn''t because of the story. So why is it popular? If it isn''t the story and it isn''t the engine it has to be the game design, and by that I mean gameplay, not story.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
