Industry veteran Kent Hudson talks about attempting to create a game that allows players to truly drive the narrative.
When we make choices in real life, we're not moving down one of a few branching paths that someone has already laid out for us. We may feel like our options are limited, but we're still shaping our own stories. For many of us, the biggest choices we make involve things that can sound rather ordinary, things like work and family. But these everyday aspects of our lives are also often what give our lives meaning, and when they pull us in different directions, the pressure can be tremendous, the emotional stakes incredibly high.
With his upcoming game The Novelist, Kent Hudson, who previously worked on big-budget projects including Deus Ex: Invisible War and BioShock 2, has set out to explore the real-life difficulty of trying to balance the people we love with the things we need to do. The game is also an attempt to tackle what he called, during a talk he gave on player-driven stories at an IGDA event in 2011, a "wicked problem": the tremendous challenge of designing a game that tells a story in which the player makes meaningful decisions that create a unique narrative that is not prescribed by a designer. In other words, a game that tells a truly player-driven story. I asked Hudson about the challenges of designing a game with such unusual and ambitious goals.
"My goal is simply to craft interesting situations that each have three equally sympathetic viewpoints, and in turn to have characters that react believably to your choices."
The Novelist is about a family, the Kaplans, who have come to a lovely coastal home for the summer. Dan Kaplan hopes to get some work done on his novel, while his wife and son have their own needs and desires. Rather than being cast as a member of the Kaplan family, you play as a ghost who inhabits the house. Of course, if the Kaplans know they're sharing the home with a specter, they're not likely to stay there and continue about their lives like everything is normal. So you need to be sneaky. "Early versions of the game gave you the ability to pick up and move objects," Hudson said, "and you could also make objects wiggle and rattle in place, but when I dug into those mechanics, it became really hard not to make it a game about scaring people. It started to verge into horror gameplay more than I wanted, so I ultimately made the decision to move the player into the background physically and push the game more toward pure stealth.
"The game is based primarily on line of sight, so staying out of sight will be very familiar to anyone that's played something like Thief or Splinter Cell. It's up to you to remain unobserved, but there are a few things that help you out. You can possess all of the light fixtures in the house, jumping back and forth between them if you want, and when you're in a light fixture, you can't be seen by the family. When you're possessing a light fixture, you can cause the lightbulb to flicker, which will attract the attention of any nearby characters. This is helpful since you have to leave the light fixtures and emerge into the house to read clues or enter a character's memory, and any time you're not in a light fixture you can be spotted."
So the stealth mechanics let you enjoy the satisfaction of sneaking around and staying out of sight, but whereas most stealth games involve goals like stealing valuable treasures or taking out high-value targets, The Novelist doesn't have such specific objectives. It's about raising questions, not about sending a particular message. Says Hudson, "My goal is simply to craft interesting situations that each have three equally sympathetic viewpoints, and in turn to have characters that react believably to your choices. I don't think I could give players a score or create a goal without implicitly editorializing and offering my own answer to the career-versus-family question, which would in turn make this a message game from me the designer instead of a question game for you the player."
What sorts of choices do you make? After exploring the thoughts of each character, you might know that Dan's wife Linda wants Dan's assistance with a project of her own, that Dan's son Tommy wants to spend some time playing with his father, and that Dan himself feels like he should get work done on his novel. You can influence Dan and make him spend his time as you see fit, but he can't be in three places at once. It's an everyday sort of decision, and like such decisions, it has repercussions. "The game," Hudson says, "is about three different points of a triangle, so to speak: Dan's career, his marriage, and his role as a father. Each decision you make has a consequence. If you choose to have Dan work on his book instead of doing what Linda or Tommy wants, then in the next chapter, those relationships will be skewed in that direction.
"If you push those relationships closer to the extremes, you start to see things spiral out of control. And if you just bounce back and forth evenly between them, you maintain a status quo that's no better or worse than when the game starts. So you need to make decisions that prioritize your values if you want to shape their lives meaningfully."
But, you might ask, isn't this just a typical branching narrative then? Sort of like Mass Effect, where the choices you make affect the situations you face and the options available to you down the line? No, it's much more structurally complex than that. Hudson wants The Novelist, as much as possible, to be a truly player-driven story. To nudge things in that direction, the chapters happen in random order. "It literally prevents me from writing a branching narrative," Hudson says. "If I don't know what comes next, I can't make future chapters contingent on the plot of previous chapters. As a matter of personal preference, I don't really enjoy branching narratives (despite having worked on games that use them) because… they just create many different crafted, designer-authored narratives. So what I've tried to do in The Novelist is make the relationships the dynamic content, not the plot. The character relationships you create are what persist through the game, and that has the by-product of putting the central question (career versus family) in the spotlight. Your answer to that question isn't based on plot developments or twists; it's based on making decisions based on your own values."
"As the player, I just want you to go through and make your own value statements through your decisions and tell the story you want to tell."
Setting out as an individual to create a game as structurally ambitious as The Novelist is a creative endeavor not entirely unlike writing a novel. Both involve a good deal of time spent alone, and probably a fair amount of wrestling with difficult creative decisions. I asked Hudson about the parallels between what he's trying to do and what his character Dan is trying to do, and if working on The Novelist has given him any insights into how to balance one's creative aspirations and one's personal life.
"I didn't start out thinking, 'Let me make a metaphorical game about my own struggle' (shoot me if I ever assume my life is so interesting that anyone else would ever want to play a game about it), but as the family context came into focus, I certainly started identifying more and more with Dan's challenges," Hudson said. "To be honest, though, while the game has certainly gotten me to think more about these issues, I don't know whether I'm any closer to having an answer; I'll probably only be able to assess how things have gone after I've finished the entire process and can view it with some distance. Working on the game is my way of processing the career-versus-family balancing act, but it's definitely an ongoing thing.
"I don't know whether career or family is more important, but I try to do my best in both areas. Since this is an issue I struggle with, it would be disingenuous for me to grade players or give them a score; there are no victory conditions or correct answers to any of the situations in the game. As the player, I just want you to go through and make your own value statements through your decisions and tell the story you want to tell.
"My hope with the game is that it's a tool for players to wrestle with these issues in their own way and develop their own answers over time. In my most recent playtest, I had a number of people finish the game and then go back to do another playthrough, convinced that they could make different decisions and create an outcome they were happier with. That tells me that something about the subject matter is resonating with people."
The Novelist is currently on Steam Greenlight and can be preordered on the game's official site.
Carolyn Petit has been reading GameSpot since 2000 and writing for it since 2008. She has a particular fondness for games of the 1980s, and intends to leave the field of games journalism as soon as she hears that her local Ghostbusters franchise is hiring.
I love this sort of experiments. They may not work as a stand-alone game, but they push the envelope of what is possible.
Not sure if it will be successful, but I wouldn't be surprised if some of the technology being developed here could be later integrated into more 'open world' games. That'd be really interesting.
This is an ambitious project and I'm thrilled that he is attempting this. And yet I'm not sure I could bring myself to actually play a game like this. Hits way too close to home to find that remotely enjoyable. The tension in real life is actually often four-fold: work, spouse, kids, and _self_. So any time I spend playing video games is "self" time for now. And I can't imagine sacrificing work-spouse-kid time to play a game about how to balance work-spouse-kid time.
Sounds like a really interesting concept. I do somewhat question the entertainment value of such a product, I already spend enough time trying to resolve the same dilemma, do I really want to do the same thing in a video game? Not likely.
The biggest plus I see out of this is that the other developers will see how this "truly player-driven" game is done and then be able to incorporate the same techniques into their future products. For a game like the mentioned Mass Effect, or even more for one like Fallout or Oblivion, this 'technology' could really open the world up and make it seem that much more believable while still clearly remaining an entertaining game.
1 Like Sounds very boring to me... I'm starting to dislike free roam in games, 'cause, honestly, I want to PLAY games, not LIVE games... Linear don't mean bad, by any means... And this game looks like it's more about living than playing than free roam games. And that appart, it still seems boring to me.
Sigh of relief... This is coming to PC and Mac.
3 Like What a amazing article, really thanks for bringing that for us! And i don't think it is a "The Sims Similar Game", it would be only for the plot, but as both are supposed to be player-driven plots they look familiar, I find this less limited than The Sims, as you don't have to do the shitty things as going to bathroom or going to work. It's a philosophical game, not a "Dumb People Simulator".
1 Like The concept seems interesing, but I never play games that remind me of real life. I want to be entertained, go on an adventure in an unknown world, not sitting in a sofa. Games that are very linear, but with excellent writing can be like great books and I highly enjoy those games. They're quite limited, but if the gameplay and level design is well done, it doesn't matter. More freedom of choice leads to more replay value, but it can often make the story seem weaker and is much harder to do. I would generally prefer a linear, great story over an open-ended one, but I do like making my own mark on the story.
@Hurvl I like both honestly and think they both have their merits. Though I don't necessarily think you have to have a weak story to have an open world game. It may not be as tight as a more controlled linear story but it still can be pretty good. But it seems developers do tend to get lazy with story on more open world RPGs.
Though if I were to do an open world RPG, I think something that would be interesting is instead of giving people infinite time to do any quest, have some quests that are time sensitive, maybe even some they have to discover before a certain point in the story or it just auto fails (they may only come across the aftermath). Maybe you don't lose the game if you fail the quest (and have them so that you can not die and still fail) but you have to make choices on the best use of your time. That might also help in making a more tight story. And sure, it means the player might not be able to do all quests and may have to make choices on what is more important, but isn't that more realistic anyways? ANd to me would make part of interesting gameplay, to have to choose best use of time.
1 Like This isn't really a new concept, its essentially the sims, just a touch more subtle and surreal. Rather than overt action for tangible rewards, you achieve the goal via manipulation of your surroundings, kind of like a person playing a video game, which i guess is the ironic revelation he is striving to put into peoples minds.
@stev69 Actually I wish the Sims was more trying to manipulate the environment to make the actions. It seemed more like just tell the people what to do. When I first heard of Sims, I was excited about the idea of manipulating the environment around and sitting back and watching how the people would react (kinda like SIm CIty). Sims is a lot more micro managing and just directly controlling the people.
@stev69 The Sims also came to mind. Instead of a God-like, isometric perspective, it's first-person. The stealth is all that separates the gameplay. And even that element is disconnected from the devs goal of "player-driven" narrative.
More power to him, but I get the feeling this will be another overly abstract, dramatically vacant narrative.
@PilaMin Exactly, and lets face it there can only be programmed a finite number of options, so the story maybe player driven but it lacks the spontaneity to make it genuinely feel like the player has any real control of the narrative, you will always have that jumping though hoops feel about it.
Also I get the feeling many people would find it an empty experience, its not just about chasing that carrot on a stick, people generally need to be able to reach that carrot, to feel like they have used their time judiciously.
@stev69 I agree totally after looking at the preview and reading the article. This seems like just a manipulation of "people" to push them in the direction you want to go like the Sims. Although it looks interesting and I wouldn't pass on trying it out. Just saying, this doesn't sound so far from what we already have seen. But we will have to wait and see more.
When I first saw the trailer, I was totally thinking "oh man, we are reenacting The Shining and are gonna try and kill our wife and kid or something" then it went "family problems." Oh then never mind then. I'm actually kind of glad its not like Lucius, that was a messed up game. Who knows, it might be kind of refreshing.
*sigh*...when finally developers remember that games are GAMES in the first place and not personal notebook.
@Kyrylo I have no problem with developers experimenting with Games as art honestly. I think there's a place for both games as a way of escape, pure fun, whatnot, and games for exploring meaning/more artistic comments.
Though I admit I'm less likely to play the latter ;). But I think it's interesting to use game as a way of exploring themes.
2 Like Looks pretty awesome from what I've seen so far but I still have a gripe with the fact that ghosts are, in essence, invisible. So the player should always be invisible...
That aside! Will be playing this one.
I would say it's more of a mirror of real life. If someone's mind consistently plays tricks on them like seeing shadows in the corner of their eye in the middle of the night, the paranoia kicks in increasingly and then everything revolves around an "apparition."
2 Like It's not the game so much that excites me. It's that he's creating a framework that future developers will be able to use in future games.
3 Like "My goal is simply to craft interesting situations that each have three equally sympathetic viewpoints"
Deus Ex Human Revolution. Done.
1 Like I love this approach but, to be honest, the context feels a bit boring. I'd rather have this system of dynamic relationships and meaningful choices and player-driven story be done in a more "game-genre" context.
Not to sound like a raging 13 yr old, but I'd rather have this in a game where I'm the leader of a nation at war, or a commander of a unit going through battle after battle, or a commander of a spaceship traveling to different planets, or whatever.
Having this system in an everyday life situation is....well......mostly like everyday life. I play a game to get out of that.
@gtsnake6 Games can be about regular life, but I choose not to buy those games, like I choose not to read those books or movies. A great setting coupled with a great story is a great combination. This game merely seems like an experiment of what can be done with storytelling. Bring that feature onto a sci-fi/fantasy landscape and I'll be interested.
1 Like I'm not convinced that he hasn't already done exactly what he said he is trying to avoid, namely creating a branching narrative.
I love the idea of dynamic relationships, as long as it actually is dynamic and not merely tools or states for a branching narrative. I am also worried that the game will feel emotional and worthwhile for Hudson but few others due to the subject matter. My instinctive reaction is why I should care about the family problems of some nobody novelist, so it's up to the game to draw me into their lives. If this experiment succeed, I hope it will be adopted into AAA games with grand settings and stories.
Oh, and since dynamic relationships is already an impressive challenge, it may not be the best idea to spend a lot of time on innovative ghost gameplay.
Best of luck!
"-previously worked on big-budget projects including Deus Ex: Invisible War and BioShock 2."
Lost all credibility with me.
1 Like And let's just ignore the fantastic Bioshock 2 that he's worked on. Those are his credentials fair and simple. He wasn't solely responsible for the disaster in Invisible War.
@MetalDogGear @Leivve I seem to be one of the few people who liked Invisible War, sure the ammo thing was a little off, but as a whole I thought it was a good game.
This is a novel way of making a Sims game. Perhaps a horror version would also be cool, for those interested in terrorizing virtual people.
It sounds interesting, but this part is funny IMO...
"Early versions of the game gave you the ability to pick up and move objects," Hudson said, "and you could also make objects wiggle and rattle in place, but when I dug into those mechanics, it became really hard not to make it a game about scaring people."
I would think a game that allows you to play as a ghost should give players the choice to scare people if they want, especially if you consider Kent Hudson's goal with this game. If you truly want to allow players to drive the narrative, allow them to do it in their own way as long as it's within reason. A ghost who scares people is definitely within reason.
Sounds great on paper very difficult to do properly.
If you say have one object lets say a toaster for sake of argument and you interact with it, Well first you need things you can do to it can I turn it on? move it? put things in it? throw it around the room? every option needs to elicit a reaction from the family for proper effect.
Let's say something simple I move it slightly there needs to be different possible reactions from the family based on their mood and focus so is dad distracted and not notice? is he quick to angry because a bad day and blames someone else? does he become paranoid after seeing this in a movie somewhere?
One small action on one small object can cause hundreds of outcomes and well this could be done, even the fact that it's a home with a family of three is a clear attempt to limit the scope so what I wonder is how "off the rails" will it really be?
1 Like It looks really interesting and I'd be interested in trying the game, but I have to wonder if it would be kind of boring or stressful to play after reading this.
Playing as a ghost is an interesting mechanic. I'm kind of reminded of the game 'Geist' in a way, except I'm not sure what all the ghost character can do besides possess lights.
I am unsure about the random chapters and the 'player-driven' story. I guess technically you do 'drive' the game by deciding whether to favor family or work, but you don't seem to make many other decisions. Maybe you can scare everyone to death and turn their house into a house of horrors. Otherwise, idk. It sounds like the game also wants you to make a choice between family or work, and it apparently doesn't make any difference if you can balance both. So where's the choice in that?
I am also one of those people who has OCD and I would freak out trying to keep everyone in the game satisfied. I don't get on well with games that have a lot of resource management, which is probably why I was awful at AOE multiplayer.
That said, the concept and the art direction seem nice. But I guess it's one of those games you have to see for yourself.
