Feedback for Call to Arms: Entry 14 - Peace
Over at FullBright blog, (which I wish I read more of) is a concept called “Peace” I really want to see work as a game. Not as a game that you win or lose but a game where you explore your views on the subject of violence. I was going to post a reply in the comments section but it got way to long. I recommend you read Christiaan’s proposal for “Peace” and then read below.
I love the concept and suggest checking out the movie, Rendition. It has a cyclical storytelling approach, where what you see in the beginning is what you see at the end, but from a different perspective. Everything else in the middle is learning a little bit why what you see at the beginning and end occurs.
I feel Peace needs more focus. Focus on the suicide bombing event itself and nothing else. You also need to say something with the interactions players can do. If I were making this game, I would say that violence begets violence, that we must take responsibility for our actions to stop the cycle of violence. Everything in the game must serve this.
I think the sequence of scenes is important. Here are my suggestions:
1. Mother with child caught in suicide bombing. In the café with the daughter, you pick up a newspaper, headlines read, “Increased security amid rumors of suicide bombing.” Daughter asks you, “What’s in the news mama?” Do you tell her that we live in a messed up world and must eliminate our enemies before they do the same to us? Do you smile and give her a kiss on the cheek? Do you try to explain to her the reality of the situation and that violence isn’t the answer?
Mood and pacing: Calm, foreboding, peaceful until the blast.
2. Soldier deals with the chaos afterwards, who’s a threat? Who do I protect? You are given orders to detain anyone you think is a possible suspect and to use any amount of force you deem necessary.
Mood and pacing: Frantic, violent, angry, hopelessness.
3. As someone else, you tell a young boy, 7 his mother died in the suicide bombing. How do you do this? Gently? Not at all? See his emotional reaction, cries, punches you in the legs.
Mood and pacing: Slow, sorrowful.
4. As a paramedic you grab someone injured, put him/her in the ambulance and then discover his/her chest is strapped with bombs. What do you do? Bomb’s disabled, your partner wants to kill the patient, do you stand by and let him/her do that? Do you try to save the patient? Do you join in?
Mood and pacing: Frantic, fearful, angry.
5. You are the suicide bomber. What might make it interesting, is that sometimes they force the bombers to press the activate button and then upon release it explodes. What if players are tricked into doing this and then, “Oh by the way, don’t release Right Trigger until we say so.” What do you, the player, the suicide bomber do then? No matter what, you are a dead man/woman. Do you try to run to an isolated area to not hurt anyone else or say, fuck it, if I’m going, then I’m bringing someone with me. Also, I think it would be very interesting if you see the other suicide bomber that you saw while as a paramedic in the same place as you. It will be interesting to be confronted with the possibilities of your actions and really hit home the idea of violence creates more violence.
Mood and pacing: Slow, fearful, sorrowful, or hopeful.
Tags: fullbright, gamedesign, peace, seriousgames, socialissues, suicidebombings, violence
July 29th, 2008 at 11:57 am
I shall have to watch that film, Rendition.
I like reincorporation as a storytelling device. It can be really powerful in showing connections that you weren’t aware of or changing your perception of a thing.
I think you’re right that it would be good to focus every vignette on the one event, though you could probably still do something like the soldier on patrol only have him nearby enough to see and hear the explosion.
I’m wary of using dialogue in the game as I’ve yet to see a solution for first person speech that is really satisfactory. Hearing a character speak for you is weird, especially if you do not choose the lines, but the Valve school of strong silent protagonist doesn’t always work either. There is the KotOR/Bloodlines solution of silently choosing written lines… but perhaps choice of words plus voice-over could work.
The recurring choices are interesting. I don’t know if pivotal decisions should be made in each segment as part of the lack of agency is that it illustrates how people are caught up in events largely beyond their control and they’re just doing what they can, or must. I wouldn’t for example want to feature a scene with a politician or military commander making decisions from afar. It’s about the people on the ground. Perhaps the choice for the paramedic could be which person to save, if they can only take one…
July 29th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Your suggestion of “choice of words plus voice-over” sounds like Mass Effect, but anytime you are in dialog, it changes to cinematic third person view. Could still work in First Person if that’s the view you want.
Everyone treats character roles differently, if I’m playing a game about suicide bombing, I don’t believe that *I* will be in that situation, so I willfully allow someone else to create a character role for me to play. Therefore, hearing a voice given to my character isn’t as jarring. It all comes down to player expectations. I see games as Improv theater more than anything else. There are certain rules and expectations the player and designers are supposed to follow or else the suspension of disbelief breaks.
In line with your final thought that people are caught up in events beyond their control, why not give players the illusion of agency. They can choose to rebel against other peoples wishes and hope their rebellion makes things turn out differently, but they don’t.
Regarding the paramedic, that can work I think but it will really shine if it is closely tied to your theme, to your message of what you want to say. Somehow, choosing which injured body to take shouldn’t be an easy decision. Maybe there are rules, a priority of who goes to the hospital first? 1. Children, 2. Women, 3. Elderly, 4. everyone else and it seems like the women and children are far away from the pick up zone, so do you risk your life to follow protocol? Especially when your partner doesn’t want to?
July 30th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Yeah, I considered Mass Effect but didn’t mention it because it’s 3rd person, though by that token I suppose KotOR is a bad example too.
I think first person dialogue still has to be chosen wisely, because even though you are *not* the roles you play it is still jarring if the words spoken do not mesh with your interpretation of the role. Valve seems to have made some progress with context-sensetive barks on NPCs though that perhaps could be applied even to a player character. If the game can read the situation sufficiently the risk of a wrong line may be low enough.
It probably would be a good idea to not have each choice in the game have all manner of branching consequences as that could easily spiral out of control. Either way I do think that for the sake of pacing it might be nice have some contrast between sequences in the amount of choice you are offered (explicitely or otherwise). A heavy dilemma might be followed by a scene where it’s very clear what you have to do and as a player you’re basically just doing what must be done by that particular character.
I think you could have scenes that are not at the place or time of the bombing as long as you connect them with the same characters. Perhaps as the Palestinian boy throwing rocks at a bulldozer there’s a moment where you see the little girl from the first scene look at you from behind a fence, until her mother pulls her along, on their way to the cafe…
Perhaps the boy is the little brother of the suicide bomber.
It would be Magnolia-esque in that threads that may not initially appear to be connected, are… The extent to which you can do this would depend on length, but I maintain that anything over 60 minutes would dilute the impact.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:47 am
[...] [edit: further discussion here and here] [...]