Disconnection from a Game's Narrative.

[Dalisclock]

In Bioshock I pretty much lost interest after the plot twist (not just in the narrative but the game all together). Presumably I'm supposed to be angry at the bad guy for what he did to me but I just didn't care. If there was a choice between going an killing the bad guy (another 2 or 3 hours of play time as I recall) or just jumping in a diving bell and leaving rapture for good right then and there (and risking death by drowning in the process) I would've taken the second option.

Yeah, Bioshock really lost all steam after that point. I frankly really didn't care about the big villian at that point and it seems the game would have been much better if it had just ended there. Sure, he runs Rapture but Rapture is broken, leaking and at the bottom of the ocean. Let him have his flooding little kingdom.

 

[The_Echo]

You know, I've literally never felt ludonarrative dissonance. Never in my life.

Even in BioShock Infinite, which is apparently infamous for being dissonant, I never had a problem.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

You know, I've literally never felt ludonarrative dissonance. Never in my life.

Even in BioShock Infinite, which is apparently infamous for being dissonant, I never had a problem.

Pretty much the same.

The only times I was taken out of the experience were during ME3, but that was when I already knew the disastorous ending, so I was already going "*sigh* Let's just get through this".

I tried to enjoy the ending, but it took me out so much, it felt so inconsequential, that I just...

*exasperation*

 

[Therumancer]

So, I played a game recently where I became disconnected from the narrative, towards the end of the story. It was a game that involved multiple universes/existing timelines. That's as much of the game I will detail, so not to delve into spoilers.

I felt that I, unconsciously, was withdrawn from my investment in the story and suddenly the characters had little to no meaning to me.

Now, I personally do not blame this game for this happening, as I thought the whole concept was clever and well done, when considering it in retrospect, but it did mean that the emotional impact of the story at the end was largely lost on me.

There is no specific reason that I can assign to why this happened, as it happened unconsciously. I did not choose to separate myself from the narrative, but just drifted away naturally. I assume it was to do with the fact that I thought the game had devalued my characters and my story by showing that there were millions of universes. To me this makes it seem like mine doesn't really matter that much, in the grand scheme of things, and to every time I win or do something good, there has been a timeline created where this didn't happen and suffering/pain ensued instead. I was just happening to continue in the World where I was succeeding, but was creating extra universes where this was not true, so really, I hadn't won or succeeded at all.

Should I blame the game for disconnecting me from the narrative? Because at the moment, I don't. Was it their fault that this happened? Should this make me rate the game any less than I did?

Have you ever lost connection with a game's narrative? Why do you think it happened?



Disclaimer: This is my first thread topic on a forum ever, so go easy on me.

Yes you should honestly. I personally didn't have that problem, but ultimately when a work disconnects the reader/watcher/listener it's the fault of the author. Your certainly not the only one to have this problem with this game, as it's been mentioned more than a few times in gaming discussion. This overall reaction is one of the reasons why I think this game while definatly good, doesn't deserve to be on so many "best of" lists simply because of the writing and the ending and the reaction it received from so many people. Some raved about it, but it fell far short of the "near universal acclaim" so many people seem to be trying to assign it.

 

[Yokillernick]

"Have you ever lost connection with a game's narrative? Why do you think it happened?"

Actually I kinda have and with a game that many people would disagree with me on: Spec Ops: The Line. The game became such a chore to play and that was even before the *shock* moment in it. It had established itself as such a standard, boring, cover based shooter that I just couldn't connect with the characters any more. I literary couldn't care less about what happened to them and I just wanted the damn thing to end. I think the fact that it wanted to make itself look like a dry TPS in order to send a deeper message might have covered it up too well resulting in a boring TPS. Plus the *shock scene* was nowhere near believable and even if they made it as believable as possible it still lacked the impact. I mean after the *shock scenes* you through other games, these fail to impress.

 

[Jadedvet]

Three questions I use to interrogate stories I am writing:

"So what?" - why should the reader care?
"Oh yeah?" - is the protagonist's action believable in their universe?
"Huh?" - can you understand what's going on?

"So what" is supremely important to the narrative of a computer game and one so many games fail to meet. I recall the climactic ending of Fable 2 in which the villain reveals he has killed some people. The entire scene fell flat because the game never did the first thing to make me care about anything or anyone in that world.

The Walking Dead on the other hand did a great job with the relationship between the players avatar/ main character and Celementine. Her character is believable and her actions in the game make her more than just a plot device in need of rescue.

 

[Fireaxe]

The Witcher 2 totally bloody lost me in chapter 2, maybe it was that everyone besides Triss was such a massive arse (on the Henslet/Roche side of the story anyway, the other path might have been less crap).

I mean I understand it's meant to be dark fantasy with no real "right" path, but I spent the entire second chapter of the game wishing that Geralt would just tell everyone to go fellate some arrows and get on with trying to find Triss (and stab Letho in the face) which seemed like his only real objective anyway with everything else just padding the game out.

 

[Ubiquitous Duck]

"Have you ever lost connection with a game's narrative? Why do you think it happened?"

Actually I kinda have and with a game that many people would disagree with me on: Spec Ops: The Line. The game became such a chore to play and that was even before the *shock* moment in it. It had established itself as such a standard, boring, cover based shooter that I just couldn't connect with the characters any more. I literary couldn't care less about what happened to them and I just wanted the damn thing to end. I think the fact that it wanted to make itself look like a dry TPS in order to send a deeper message might have covered it up too well resulting in a boring TPS. Plus the *shock scene* was nowhere near believable and even if they made it as believable as possible it still lacked the impact. I mean after the *shock scenes* you through other games, these fail to impress.

I had a strange time with this game.

It is one of my top game experiences I feel though, so I am quite separate to your conclusion about it.

The 'shock scene' as you call it, I assume I know what you are referring to, was spoiled for me before I even started playing the game. Not specifically the event that occurs, but just the fact that something occurs along those lines. This leaves me very annoyed when I started playing the game, as I sat there just waiting for it to happen, whatever it is, and that disconnects me to some extent.

In the end though, I really valued what the game was trying to do. It was a bog-standard 3rd person fps shooter in many respects, I get that, but it was also a parody of that at the same time. It kind of mocked you for enjoying it, if you did, and mocked the industry of those games at large, although it was one itself at the same time. Very weird experience.

I definitely credit it though for trying to be something more than the standard and having a clear motive/argument to put across to the player.

 

[Ubiquitous Duck]

So, I played a game recently where I became disconnected from the narrative, towards the end of the story. It was a game that involved multiple universes/existing timelines. That's as much of the game I will detail, so not to delve into spoilers.

I felt that I, unconsciously, was withdrawn from my investment in the story and suddenly the characters had little to no meaning to me.

Now, I personally do not blame this game for this happening, as I thought the whole concept was clever and well done, when considering it in retrospect, but it did mean that the emotional impact of the story at the end was largely lost on me.

There is no specific reason that I can assign to why this happened, as it happened unconsciously. I did not choose to separate myself from the narrative, but just drifted away naturally. I assume it was to do with the fact that I thought the game had devalued my characters and my story by showing that there were millions of universes. To me this makes it seem like mine doesn't really matter that much, in the grand scheme of things, and to every time I win or do something good, there has been a timeline created where this didn't happen and suffering/pain ensued instead. I was just happening to continue in the World where I was succeeding, but was creating extra universes where this was not true, so really, I hadn't won or succeeded at all.

Should I blame the game for disconnecting me from the narrative? Because at the moment, I don't. Was it their fault that this happened? Should this make me rate the game any less than I did?

Have you ever lost connection with a game's narrative? Why do you think it happened?



Disclaimer: This is my first thread topic on a forum ever, so go easy on me.

Yes you should honestly. I personally didn't have that problem, but ultimately when a work disconnects the reader/watcher/listener it's the fault of the author. Your certainly not the only one to have this problem with this game, as it's been mentioned more than a few times in gaming discussion. This overall reaction is one of the reasons why I think this game while definatly good, doesn't deserve to be on so many "best of" lists simply because of the writing and the ending and the reaction it received from so many people. Some raved about it, but it fell far short of the "near universal acclaim" so many people seem to be trying to assign it.

I'm trying to separate the discussion from the specific game I played, so I won't be saying what game it is.

What I feel is that the game used multiple universes/existing timelines, which I have never accepted in any story I have had it come up in. Maybe there is a world where I would accept it, but I have not come across it. This is why I don't necessarily feel I should blame the game itself, as I see it as my own failing.

Some people did continue on feeling attached, but I immediately disconnected upon this revelation. I felt no hatred or annoyance towards the game itself, as it is fair enough to use this type of reality in storytelling. But for me, I no longer felt any investment in the characters. I can't even be sure as to why, because it was an unconscious separation. So I kept the game high in my opinions, but was more disappointed that I could not be more emotionally attached to the story, just because they involved a story element I naturally separate from.

Or maybe they are to blame and I should blame them. If I ever do come across a story involving multiple universes that I do get involved in, I would probably revise my view.

 

[Veldt Falsetto]

I'm having this problem with Ni No Kuni, not because of the writing or characters or anything but because the way JRPG mechanics work, this emphasis on side quest is really putting me off the game. The story is great but when it isn't prevalent, even in the slightest, I find it hard to carry on.

 

[Maximum Bert]

The Last Remnant kinda did this although to be fair I had little connection with the narrative to start with. Leaving aside the horrible art style and gameplay the characters looked really stiff like as if NetherRealm had made the game but what really threw me off were the accents and how atrocious they were especially the guy who did King Dave where he would just swing in and out of american/australian (cant remember exactly I have been trying hard to forget) and really bad forced cockney sometimes in the middle of the same sentence.

There was also the famous (ok not that famous) plot twist in the middle which was so ridiculously stupid and badly handled that I cannot believe it was played straight if anyone has seen Beerfest imagine that plot twist that happens when the one guy dies played seriously thats what The Last Remnant did.

The other game where I felt it really noticeably was in the walking dead by telltale games. The first two episodes I loved then the cracks started to appear and you know that what choices you make ultimately dont matter save one person and you know soon the other person will die soon anyway back up someone over another and it ultimately wont matter anyway. In the end it felt less powerful to me because of the choices and robbed the characters of their personality in the end I really had trouble caring about them at all as I just felt like I was going through the motions. Strange as it may sound if the game had removed all interaction and had a set story and the characters dealt with things on their own I would have enjoyed it more and liked the characters more. I havent articulated that well but I think the disconnect was felt so harshly because there is nothing else in the game to save it.

 

[Ubiquitous Duck]

The Last Remnant kinda did this although to be fair I had little connection with the narrative to start with. Leaving aside the horrible art style and gameplay the characters looked really stiff like as if NetherRealm had made the game but what really threw me off were the accents and how atrocious they were especially the guy who did King Dave where he would just swing in and out of american/australian (cant remember exactly I have been trying hard to forget) and really bad forced cockney sometimes in the middle of the same sentence.

There was also the famous (ok not that famous) plot twist in the middle which was so ridiculously stupid and badly handled that I cannot believe it was played straight if anyone has seen Beerfest imagine that plot twist that happens when the one guy dies played seriously thats what The Last Remnant did.

The other game where I felt it really noticeably was in the walking dead by telltale games. The first two episodes I loved then the cracks started to appear and you know that what choices you make ultimately dont matter save one person and you know soon the other person will die soon anyway back up someone over another and it ultimately wont matter anyway. In the end it felt less powerful to me because of the choices and robbed the characters of their personality in the end I really had trouble caring about them at all as I just felt like I was going through the motions. Strange as it may sound if the game had removed all interaction and had a set story and the characters dealt with things on their own I would have enjoyed it more and liked the characters more. I havent articulated that well but I think the disconnect was felt so harshly because there is nothing else in the game to save it.

I'm afraid you can never find me backing up the hating on The Walking Dead - I love that game far too much.

I realise that the game had limitations, as you cannot have decisions be a game-changer without having to develop multiple story-lines, presumably very large chunks of which some gamers will never see (depending on their decisions). This would massively increase the production time and would mean they would have to formulate many stories and endings and lots of games can't even get one ending right. So I do feel to an extent for them on its difficulty of execution, but yes, they don't really approach it.

This did make the smaller decisions matter more to me though. A lot of what I like about the apocalypse/end of the world scenario, are the people who are seeking out justice and humanity in a broken world. Everyone is going to die, but this is not justification for brutality and murder, so I really get into the aspects that involve showing humanity and decency.

So yes, the man I didn't murder may only live to die tomorrow and he did commit atrocities, but that doesn't mean I should steep to the level he has become accustomed to and pitchfork him through the brain.

 

[Maximum Bert]

The Last Remnant kinda did this although to be fair I had little connection with the narrative to start with. Leaving aside the horrible art style and gameplay the characters looked really stiff like as if NetherRealm had made the game but what really threw me off were the accents and how atrocious they were especially the guy who did King Dave where he would just swing in and out of american/australian (cant remember exactly I have been trying hard to forget) and really bad forced cockney sometimes in the middle of the same sentence.

There was also the famous (ok not that famous) plot twist in the middle which was so ridiculously stupid and badly handled that I cannot believe it was played straight if anyone has seen Beerfest imagine that plot twist that happens when the one guy dies played seriously thats what The Last Remnant did.

The other game where I felt it really noticeably was in the walking dead by telltale games. The first two episodes I loved then the cracks started to appear and you know that what choices you make ultimately dont matter save one person and you know soon the other person will die soon anyway back up someone over another and it ultimately wont matter anyway. In the end it felt less powerful to me because of the choices and robbed the characters of their personality in the end I really had trouble caring about them at all as I just felt like I was going through the motions. Strange as it may sound if the game had removed all interaction and had a set story and the characters dealt with things on their own I would have enjoyed it more and liked the characters more. I havent articulated that well but I think the disconnect was felt so harshly because there is nothing else in the game to save it.

I'm afraid you can never find me backing up the hating on The Walking Dead - I love that game far too much.

I realise that the game had limitations, as you cannot have decisions be a game-changer without having to develop multiple story-lines, presumably very large chunks of which some gamers will never see (depending on their decisions). This would massively increase the production time and would mean they would have to formulate many stories and endings and lots of games can't even get one ending right. So I do feel to an extent for them on its difficulty of execution, but yes, they don't really approach it.

This did make the smaller decisions matter more to me though. A lot of what I like about the apocalypse/end of the world scenario, are the people who are seeking out justice and humanity in a broken world. Everyone is going to die, but this is not justification for brutality and murder, so I really get into the aspects that involve showing humanity and decency.

So yes, the man I didn't murder may only live to die tomorrow and he did commit atrocities, but that doesn't mean I should steep to the level he has become accustomed to and pitchfork him through the brain.

Maybe I should clarify before I get a load of hate. I did not hate the walking dead actually overall I kinda liked it just not as much as others it seems and I never really felt much weight from the narrative but for me that was because of how it was constructed. I also know why they took the route they did however since they pretty much had to take that route I dont agree with the design and felt while it was not bad it resulted in a weaker finalised product.

Likewise while I can in some way see how you may view the killing of people in this game as bad and how you wouldnt lower yourself to do that unless absolutely neccesary for me I never really thought about that as I never really connected with the characters in that way at least not later anyway because I just felt so disconnected that either way carried no weight for me and particularly at the end I just realised that I felt nothing for Lee and Clem I was just playing because I wanted to finish the game. For me the game just went on to long with the framework it had in place if it had ended after 2 episodes I would have been far less damning.

Obviously this is just me saying that for me personally it disconnected quite acutely especially after episode 2 many didnt feel this way I have a friend who really enjoyed the whole thing and I cant say the narrative was particularly bad its just the design behind the narrative that weakened it for me it somehow lessened the characters and made them much harder to see as anything more than fantasy creations that have no definitive identity or story behind them almost like its not really their story just a story they have been plonked into and any set of characters would have done. It also why I have a problem taking any created characters in RPGs seriously as I feel they just dont belong they are just a nobody.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

"Ludonarrative dissonance", is it?

I can name one such title that did this to me in recent times, which was Amnesia: A Machine For Pigs, and much more recently, Batman: Arkham Origins.

Something about the way Batman handles the crime scenes in Origin just stinks of "Batman Deduction" (which is a bad thing).

 

[Avalanche91]

Well..... Pokemon. I know narrative isn't its strong suit and I love the series, but the connection between the game and it's narrative is pretty horrible.

-No, I really DON'T need a reminder on how to catch pokemon.
-I got the pokegod of all creation in my PC.
-I just used the physical manifestation of the ocean to kill a rat. Now it's slightly stronger.
-This creature has an IQ of 3000. I'm going to teach it how to light a dark cave for me.
-This creature is implied to have once been human, now forced to carry his previous face around and cry. Let's cram it in a tiny ball.
-Lets use pokemon to convince people to free their pokemon.
-Lets turn all the land into ocean.

I could go on. Like I said, I love pokemon, but it becomes really stupid if you start thinking about some of the stuff that goes on.

 

[Ubiquitous Duck]

"Ludonarrative dissonance", is it?

I can name one such title that did this to me in recent times, which was Amnesia: A Machine For Pigs, and much more recently, Batman: Arkham Origins.

Something about the way Batman handles the crime scenes in Origin just stinks of "Batman Deduction" (which is a bad thing).

Not ludonarrative dissonance exclusively.

I believe that refers to instances where there is a disagreement or conflict between the gameplay and the narrative. This could cause a disconnection from the narrative and obviously is relevant, but my example is a separation from emotive investment in the narrative, due to the narrative itself, not anything necessarily to do with the gameplay.

I've not tried the latest instalment of the Batman series. How does the Origin crime scene investigation alter the experience? (I'm guessing since you named Origin and not the series as a whole that you liked the previous versions, but a change in Origin kind of broke it for you)

 

[Ubiquitous Duck]

Well..... Pokemon. I know narrative isn't its strong suit and I love the series, but the connection between the game and it's narrative is pretty horrible.

-No, I really DON'T need a reminder on how to catch pokemon.
-I got the pokegod of all creation in my PC.
-I just used the physical manifestation of the ocean to kill a rat. Now it's slightly stronger.
-This creature has an IQ of 3000. I'm going to teach it how to light a dark cave for me.
-This creature is implied to have once been human, now forced to carry his previous face around and cry. Let's cram it in a tiny ball.
-Lets use pokemon to convince people to free their pokemon.
-Lets turn all the land into ocean.

I could go on. Like I said, I love pokemon, but it becomes really stupid if you start thinking about some of the stuff that goes on.

I get why each instalment of a series could have tutorials, in case it is the first version of the game for someone. But they should really have the option to skip. I find myself forever jamming the skip/next button when playing Pokemon, just trying to get things to move along faster. This is definitely hampered by tutorials. Especially since I was taught how to catch a Pokemon, immediately after I'd just caught one myself.

Pokemon is quite strange, because it seems to be raising those moral questions about itself in its games now, but your character never has a choice to do anything. I don't count rejecting the concept of keeping Pokemon and having battles by quitting the game and not playing. That isn't really a choice, as it just is shutting down the game. There is no way to continue playing, without having Pokemon battles and housing at least some Pokemon in pokeballs/computer storage.

I never really feel like Pokemon has a strong narrative though, the story always just feels to me like natural progression through gym badges. Maybe I'm massively missing the point, to be honest I haven't played all of them, but the story is always the same and I can't say I've ever felt invested in the characters. I wouldn't say it is trying and failing though.

It's pretty barbaric as well if you don't catch the Pokemon, as you essentially beat Pokemon till they almost die and then leave them there and walk off.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

I believe that refers to instances where there is a disagreement or conflict between the gameplay and the narrative. This could cause a disconnection from the narrative and obviously is relevant, but my example is a separation from emotive investment in the narrative, due to the narrative itself, not anything necessarily to do with the gameplay.

I've not tried the latest instalment of the Batman series. How does the Origin crime scene investigation alter the experience? (I'm guessing since you named Origin and not the series as a whole that you liked the previous versions, but a change in Origin kind of broke it for you)

To avoid spoilers, the first and most important crime scene I was tasked with doing had Batman narrating some extremely implausible conclusions based on what I perceived to be extremely vague clues. This being an Arkham game, it broke consistency with previous crime scene investigations.