[MUD-Dev] Ray Feist interview

[Brian 'Psychochild' Green]

After a brief visit to the significant other's parents in another state
and recovering from the plague, I'm back in action.  Kinda.  *cough*
*hack* *cough*

"Koster, Raph" wrote:
> 
> Stratics just did an interview with Raymond Feist on massively
> multiplayer games. Thought there'd be some interesting debates based
> on it, if we got Lee to pipe up. :)

I wish Stratics had given a bit more context for this interview.  Did
they assault the poor man with questions out of the blue?  Is he
trying to give an informed opinion on storytelling and the online
medium?

Anyway, having my own opinions on the matter, I thought I'd weigh in.
 
> start quote--->  [Raymond Feist interview as quoted by Raph]

My first issue was with the following:
 
> I've tried Meridian, Ultima, and EverQuest. My playing time on each is
> probably in the area of an hour or two, so my impressions are based on
> limited exposure. 

An hour per game?  If I only read the first chapter of a novel, could I
count myself informed enough to give a review?  Obviously not.

Yet, Feist's statement does show us issues the online medium has to deal
with.  First, we have not perfected our "hook".  I know of several
friends that couldn't "get into" the first few chapters of a book and
put it down.  A good storyteller gets the audience hooked into the story
from the beginning.  There are several techniques for accomplishing
this in other media, and we've only recently seen video games in general
get more compelling hooks.  An example that comes to mind immediately is
the intro to Half-Life.

We also see the issue of time investment in online RPGs.  An hour of
playing a single player game is usually enough to get a feel for the
game.  An hour of playing solitaire is probably an overkill.  Yet, an
hour of playing a  typical MUD and you've only just started to scratch
the surface of the game.  Is this a function of the online medium and
the demands of large-scale multiplayer games?  Or, are there ways to
give potential players a better taste of the game within an hour of
playing time?

I think the biggest flaw with this interview is that Feist, while a
respected author, doesn't quite understand MUDs.  For example:

> 2. Do you feel that an MMOG is capable of telling an in-depth, quality
> story on the level of one of your novels?
> 
> No, nor would you want to. RPG's and novels serve two different
> functions.

RPGs and novels both serve the same function, to entertain.  The
difference is the interactivity.  So far, it's been a struggle to tell a
compelling story in an interactive medium.  It's important to remember
that storytelling medium has its particular strengths and weaknesses. 
Novels that are literally transcribed into movies generally make poor
movies.  Sometimes the elements that make a story in one medium a great
experience makes that story's translation to another medium difficult.  

Simply put, you cannot directly apply storytelling techniques from
traditional, non-interactive media to the online medium.  You are going
to be disappointed every time.

Feist goes on to say:

> 3. What drawbacks do you feel there is in telling a story in an MMOG?
> 
> First of all, there's no coherent single source for the story. 

This doesn't make sense.  Several of my favorite stories don't have a
"coherent single source" for the story.  For example, political intrigue
is most interesting to read about when you know there are multiple
forces working against each other simultaneously.  You may not learn all
about each group's machinations all at once, but the best stories do let
you see glimpses of what went on behind closed doors.

> And usually, if you break the narrative down it reads like, "We kicked
> down a door, killed something, got the treasure. We rested, healed our
> wounds, and went to the next door, which we kicked down, then we
> killed something, then got the treasure." In a story, a little of that
> goes a long way. 

I also think this description is terribly simplistic.  I've heard of
some great political games going on in games like Achaea that don't fit
this description.  Even Meridian 59, crippled by it's terrible interface
;), had interesting events and even guild wars that were more complex
than "beat up monsters and get treasure".

> Often people confuse the concept of plot and
> story. "King dies, queen dies," is a plot. "King dies, queen dies of a
> broken heart," is a story. In an on-line game, the players have to
> "fill in the colors" in their head that turns the plot of "kick door,
> kill monster, get treasure, repeat as needed," into a story, "the
> quest for the Silver Dagger," or whatever it is. 

I think this issue, plot vs. story, is important to consider.  MUD
developers are often wrapped up into mechanically generating plot that
they forget to include the vital bits that turn the plot elements into a
story.  Players can put together the bits and pieces to find a story,
but they don't have to.

And, nothing says that all stories have to originate in the game. 
Tiny-derived MUDs have done a great job of having engaging stories that
originate entirely from player actions.  And this doesn't even consider
Raph's theories on post facto storytelling by players.
 
> It's not about a story. If it was about the designers concept
> of the story, it wouldn't be a MMOG, it would be a movie, and we'd all
> watch it while eating popcorn. I love a good movie. Just saw
> "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" yesterday and it was incredible. It's
> a terrible role playing game, but then it's a terrible sports car,
> too, if you see my point.

I think this is the centerpiece of Feist's confusion, and perhaps this
explains the above quote about no "coherent single source" for story. 
An online RPG isn't about a single story, it's about many (often
simultaneous) stories.

I recently saw the movie Feist mentioned (highly recommended), and agree
that it is a wonderful movie.  I agree, that making an RPG that deals
only with the story contained in that movie would be an awful online
RPG.  Yet, the story presented in "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" would
fit wonderfully in an online RPG with an appropriate setting.  This
wouldn't be the only story, so it couldn't be the entire focus of the
game.  There could easily be multiple stories of this type in a game.

I think multiple simultaneous stories and lack of narrative control are
what scare traditional storytellers about our medium.  No other medium
offers these challenges, and it's what makes our medium so exciting,
IMHO.

Yet, I think some understanding does appear in this interview:
 
> 9. Should players determine the direction and resolution of a story,
> or should GMs guide the players towards the intended result?
> 
> Again, do you want to watch a movie or play a game. I think you set up
> the parts of the machine, then get out of the way and see how the
> players screw with it. That's a big part of the fun.
 
This is what makes the medium worthwhile: the players.  The players need
to feel part of the game.  If you try to shove them through a
pre-determined story, people won't feel part of the game.  They at least
want the illusion of control.  Games are interactive experiences, and we
must never forget that.

In all, I disagree that you cannot tell compelling stories in the online
medium; however, I think there are a lot of challenges we have to face
in order to tell stories like those that one finds in other media.  This
challenge is what makes me get up in the morning and love my job. :)

--
"And I now wait / to shake the hand of fate...."  -"Defender", Manowar
     Brian Green, brian at psychochild.org  aka  Psychochild
       |\      _,,,---,,_      *=* Morpheus, my kitten, says "Hi!" *=*
 ZZzz  /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_   "They're not bugs, they're 'place-
      |,4-  ) )-,_..;\ (  `'-'    holders for code that works.'"
     '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)         - Andrew Kirmse, Meridian 59 creator
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev