"Dangling carrots" works best if you get the player's emotions involved. Simply stating "go rescue the princess" works at the most basic level (mainly because princesses are the "prize" in folk tales and platformers alike). It works better if you flesh the princess out to a full character before she gets kidnapped, as the player now associates the princess with an actual person.

Even better is to make the princess a sidekick who helps you through the early parts of the game, as now you've got a strong connection with the player. Better still would be the act of getting kidnapped was a sacrifice on her part, as the player now owes her a favour.

Of course there's a whole bunch of variants on that, but the more emotional layers you can put on your MacGuffin that you're using to draw the player through the game then the greater pull they'll have to complete your main objective.

Re: Solaria

You are thinking about the problem backward. The reason that the player feels 'forced' is because your story is uninteresting. When the player is bored at the story, there is no suspension of belief. When your story is good, the player wants to be led by the storyline because the storyline is one step ahead than the player in its creativity, and the player wants to know how the story unfolds.

In summary, you shouldn't be looking for techniques to entice the player to a bad story. You should be focusing on fixing the story.

Well, in a game with a third-person camera, it is much easier to "force" the player simply because seeing the character on the screen reinforces the fact that you are still you, you're just controlling another being. In that sense, games like Zelda or Mario can get away with it much easier because the third-person camera still gives the character a strong sense of identity separate from the player.

However, in first-person games, it's very strongly implied that the player is the character (not merely controlling). In this case, games like Bioshock do a good job of making you want to follow their commands, mainly (in the case of Bioshock) because if you don't, you'll (probably) die.

And it is easier to get a player to follow a linear storyline in a game than I think most realize. For the most part, the player picked up the game in order to experience an event they couldn't do otherwise, and as such, they are likely to participate in the game world rather than fight against it.

Trapper Zoid - Good thinking! It might be a tad bit tricky to apply to my setting - as I'm going for a world where you can trust no one, but it might just work if I tweak it the right way! Ooo ooo.... aaaaaa.... oooo... I think you just set off a whole chain of ideas!! Yes!!! Thank you!!!!

Wai & Sulphix - I appreciate what you are trying to say, and of course understand it quite well. I have played plenty of games with fantastic storylines in which I was eager to be "forced" in it because it was so interesting. However, I always felt that no matter how fantastic a storyline is, I couldn't get around the feeling that it was kind of like watching a movie, except I needed to press the right buttons at the right time to progress the story. And when that is the case, I might as well have hired a movie from the local store instead of buying a game.

That's why I'm thinking of the problem backwards, so that before I actually write the story, I have some points to take into consideration. Because coming up with a fantastic plot is a whole world of difference to doing the writing of a fantastic game. (Note: my plot is not a "save the world" type of plot anyway.)

The game that comes to mind is Planescape: Torment, where the storyline was really compelling, but there were very few moments when I felt it was like a movie. Some of the reasons why I felt in control (even though it is a relatively linear game):

- The Nameless One was an interesting character, whom I could mold to my desire (good/evil/warrior/mage). On top of being interesting, he was also very competent. He didn't start out stupid (just without memory), and I found it fascinating to discover more about his past.

- Which brings me to point two: the whole game revolved around him. No, I should say, the whole world revolved around him. His previous lives had shaped and scarred the world around him and those who lived in it. People buzzed around him like flies, sometimes not even knowing why they were compelled to help him. There was no "saving the princess" business. It was purely about him and his immortality. He was not running errands for others (unless there was something greater to be gained), others were running errands for him!

- While the confrontation with his mortality was the goal of the game, at no point was the Nameless one forced to find it. You kind of just drift in that direction, because you get to a point where everything comes together, you learn about the evils and downsides of this immortality business you're into, and everything that has to do with it. Sure, there are some of those "find your journal" quests. But while you're at it, there are tons of side-quests to explore, if you want. And really, finding your own journal because you don't remember a thing is quite different from "do a favour/save person X".

So yes, the story itself is not a typical cliche and it's a good story. But it's the way it was written that made it good, not the concept of it. I'm just trying to learn the good of the "floating into the right direction" kind of games, without repeating the whole "I have lost my memory and must find my immortality" thing. ^_^

By the way, can anyone recommend any "float in the right direction" games? Cause I can't think of that many... ^_~

Solaria

I think you'll find a link between "float in the right direction" games, and games with plots revolving around solving a mystery about the player - rather than completing an objective.

The expansion to Neverwinter Nights 2, Mask of the Betrayer, also does this. It is the closest game to Planescape: Torment in style that I know of.

Just thinking about PS:T makes me want to write. What an incredible game.

Re:

I under your perspective but I feel obligated to point out the mistake of linking 'good story' and 'movie-like' in the context of game stories. The unique advantage of presenting stories in the form of games is the capability to encode the premise of a story through interaction. Traditionally, you tell a story by being descriptive and by using imagery. In the medium of games, you have a set of new tool:

The constraints in the environment that defines how a player makes decisions.

When I said that you should probably focus on the story, I meant instead of telling the player the story, let the player get the story by letting the player do the actions that forms the story. It is not efficient to explain this in words, so I will just leave an exercise:

Describe your game without using adjectives or adverbs.

If your game still sounds interesting, then you know what I mean.

Perhaps the hero believes the wizard because deep down he knows what the wizard says is true. Maybe he saves the world because something within him compels him to do so. In other words, the prophecy, magic powers, dragon blood, etc serve to "force" the hero into action.

******edited to add*****

The small guy with something to prove might also be worth looking into. The hero does it because no one else thinks he can and he's going to prove them all wrong!

Quote: Original post by Hypnotron
The challenge to designing these sorts of systems...

This is a good post, particularly the emphasis that at heart a game is a system. In my opinion, game designers should alter their viewpoint that they are supposed to be telling a story and focus instead on creating complex systems from which player-driven stories can emerge. Because game designers are artists they don't want to let go of authorship but its inevitable and necessary, IMO.

If you don't want to force the player, then don't allow anything in your game to accelerate~

Anyways, you need to force them a little bit. The developer should represent a parent, and the player a child. Guide the player in the beginning but lessen your guidance as they "grow up" and understand the game (and become immersed in the story). After a certain point, allow them to make all of the decisions and have more of a choice.

I didn't read them all, but it always seemed to me that charity is easy to believe if you are the beneficiary. That's why internet scams work. Otherwise, someone randomly contacting you from South Africa, in hopes that you'll help her transfer a cool million into your bank account so you can distribute it to the poor, might sound weird.

When I played Legend of Dragoon, I wanted to go with Rose because I got freaking cool dragon armor and wings. People tend to be greedy, and you don't have to let that go to waste. If they want to see your story, that's all it'll take.