Advertisement

Choose Your Permanent Adventure: Towards a Framework for Irreversible Storygames

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11869)

Abstract

The majority of interactive narrative games allow the player to save their progress as the game unfolds. These save game options are either automatically enforced or manual. However, there is an increasing trend for interactive narrative games to be ‘irreversible’. In such cases, this makes it difficult for the player to load or access previous save games. As a result, the player’s sense of agency changes within the game, as the stakes and consequences of their story decisions are more difficult to reverse, and thus take on a feeling of permanence. Through close readings of The Walking Dead: Season One, Sorcery! and Undertale, this paper aims to provide an initial framework for irreversible storygames by (i) defining the different types of irreversibility by analyzing three games in which the form of irreversibility differs, and (ii) exploring subjective factors of the user experience that may be impacted by the different types of irreversibility.

Keywords

Storygames Irreversibility Agency Rereading Replay 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research is funded in part under the Singapore Ministry of Education Academic Research Fund Tier 1 grant FY2018-FRC2-003, “Understanding Repeat Engagement with Dynamically Changing Computational Media”.

References

  1. 1.
    Adams, E.W.: Fundamentals of Game Design. New Riders Games (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Murray, J.H.: Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. The MIT Press (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reed, A.: Changeful Tales: Design-Driven Approaches Toward More Expressive Storygames (2017)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Calinescu, M.: Rereading. Yale University Press (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mitchell, A., McGee, K.: Reading again for the first time: a model of rereading in interactive stories. In: Oyarzun, D., Peinado, F., Young, R.M., Elizalde, A., Méndez, G. (eds.) ICIDS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7648, pp. 202–213. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34851-8_20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Selig, R.L.: The endless reading of fiction: stuart Moulthrop’s hypertext novel “victory garden”. Contemp. Lit. 41, 642–660 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peacock, A.: Towards an aesthetic of ‘the interactive’. Digit. Creat. 12, 237–246 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murray, J.: From game-story to cyberdrama. In: Wardrip-Fruin, N., Harrigan, P. (eds.) First person: New Media as Story, Performance, and Game, pp. 2–11. The MIT Press (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Murray, J.H.: Why Paris needs hector and lancelot needs mordred: using traditional narrative roles and functions for dramatic compression in interactive narrative. In: Si, M., Thue, D., André, E., Lester, J.C., Tanenbaum, T.J., Zammitto, V. (eds.) ICIDS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7069, pp. 13–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25289-1_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ryan, M.-L.: The interactive onion: layers of user participation in digital narrative texts. In: Page, R.E., Thomas, B. (eds.) New Narratives: Stories and Storytelling in the Digital Age, pp. 35–62. Lincoln, Bison (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Douglas, J.Y.: The End of Books - or Books Without End? Reading Interactive Narratives. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kleinman, E., Carstensdottir, E., El-Nasr, M.S.: Going forward by going back: re-defining rewind mechanics in narrative games. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games, pp. 32:1–32:6. ACM, New York (2018)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bizzocchi, J., Tanenbaum, T.J.: Well read: applying close reading techniques to gameplay experiences. In: Davidson, D. (ed.) Well Played 3.0, pp. 262–290. ETC Press (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Telltale Games: The Walking Dead: Season 1 (Computer Game) (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Inkle: Sorcery! (Computer Game series)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fox, T.: Undertale (Computer Game) (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Inkle: Sorcery! Part 4: The Crown of Kings (Computer Game) (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tanenbaum, T.J.: Believability, adaptivity, and performativity: three lenses for the analysis of interactive storytelling (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dahpie: Selling your……is a PERMENANT DECISION. Spoilers. https://steamcommunity.com/app/391540/discussions/0/523897653304070081/
  20. 20.
    Bethesda Softworks: Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (Computer Game) (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Murray, J.H.: Research into interactive digital narrative: a kaleidoscopic view. In: International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling, pp. 3–17 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Breznican, A.: Spielberg, Zemeckis say video games, film could become one (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Aarseth, E.J.: Cybertext: Perspectives on Ergodic Literature. The Johns Hopkins University Press (1997)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mateas, M.: A preliminary poetics for interactive drama and games. Digit. Creat. 12, 140–152 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Nanyang PolytechnicSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations