|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » RPGWatch Side Quest - Manipulation and Perversion

Default RPGWatch Side Quest - Manipulation and Perversion

January 8th, 2008, 12:08
It's nearly time to kick off some formal content for 2008 but it's been a while since we've had a Side Quest discussion piece, so we'll ease into the year with some conversation. Corwin raises the interesting subject of developer manipulation in RPGs - but then adds an oddball theory into the mix, so it might be fun to see where this goes:
What brought all these thoughts rushing through my head this morning was the ending for Act 1 of The Witcher. I feel manipulated. The Reverend is an obnoxious, arrogant, offensive, hypocrite. He's also old, ugly, male and has a loud, grating voice. There's not much more the developers could have done to make me dislike him either directly, or indirectly.
Read it all here. Don't forget to add your comments; very minor spoilers for The Witcher might apply.
More information.
Dhruin is offline

Dhruin

Dhruin's Avatar
SasqWatch
Super Moderator
RPGWatch Team

#1

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 11,967

Default 

January 8th, 2008, 12:08
Of course RPG games are all about manipulation, in a sense - being manipulated into following the story that is, when "real" people would probably do anything but. But I can't say I have felt manipulated in the sense that Corwin describes, or deliberately taken the "other" choice because I thought the developers were pushing me a certain way. I have however made choices that seemed "less obvious" simply to see if I was actually allowed to follow through with it, or if it was a pseudo-choice that would railroad me back to the main path quickly by some trick. A test of sorts on how easy it is to poke holes in the illusion. How annoyed I was that the seeming "choice" to join Dagoth Ur in Morrowind never materialized. Or the many dialogue "choices" in Baldurs Gate that all funneled me into fighting the NPC anyway. How pleasant a surprise in the witcher that actually allows you to walk to your own doom
Spoiler – The Witcher Chapter 2

I guess it's part of the core "feel" of a good game as many here define it, that you feel that choices you can make are real - if that feeling comes up (like it did in the witcher) I don't metagame choices but simply try to follow what I think is suitable for the character I am playing.
GhanBuriGhan is offline

GhanBuriGhan

GhanBuriGhan's Avatar
Wose extraordinaire

#2

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,483

Default 

January 8th, 2008, 15:08
The abigail / priest choice is a tricky one . . . to modern eyes the priest was obviously a total wanker with serious issues with women, to the kind of superstitious, largely misogynistic peasants of the sort of era they were trying to evoke he would have been largely unremarkable. In order to capture the feel of a mediaeval witchhunt they had to make a character than anyone with a modern day moral framework would have no choice but to dislike, which made it feel a bit like a foregone conclusion what one would choose.

But then I did feel pretty bad when it ended up with me basically slaughtering the whole village as a result.
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#3

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348

Default 

January 8th, 2008, 16:07
Hehe, well if you choose to sleep with Abigail after you get that card of her, the choice should be much easier ( she looks like a total lunatic smeared in blood and surrounded by dead skulls! )
GothicGothicness is offline

GothicGothicness

GothicGothicness's Avatar
SasqWatch

#4

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,243

Default 

January 8th, 2008, 17:09
RPG is something you can do alone, but at its soul role-play gaming is something that's done collaboratively. It's like dancing. It's like sex. To experience the good stuff, you need a partner who's willing and able.

Something's wrong if you find yourself wondering whether you're being manipulated. That's what Johns ask themselves when prostitutes offer them choices. Those guys are kidding themselves.

That's why "choice and consequence" will never really satisfy. No matter how many choices you're offered, it won't ever be enough when you're the only one making the decisions. The game needs to make its own decisions about similar kinds of choices, and those should be enigmatic, beguiling, and a bit alluring.

Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. — [Joni Mitchell]
Squeek is offline

Squeek

Squeek's Avatar
connoisseur of tidbits

#5

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,807

Default 

January 8th, 2008, 17:53
Originally Posted by Squeek View Post
RPG is something you can do alone, but at its soul role-play gaming is something that's done collaboratively. It's like dancing. It's like sex. To experience the good stuff, you need a partner who's willing and able.

Something's wrong if you find yourself wondering whether you're being manipulated. That's what Johns ask themselves when prostitutes offer them choices. Those guys are kidding themselves.

That's why "choice and consequence" will never really satisfy. No matter how many choices you're offered, it won't ever be enough when you're the only one making the decisions. The game needs to make its own decisions about similar kinds of choices, and those should be enigmatic, beguiling, and a bit alluring.
The game making choice - Are you talking about a Dungeon Master AI, multiplayer, or even Pen & Paper? I couldn't quite follow your meaning here.
GhanBuriGhan is offline

GhanBuriGhan

GhanBuriGhan's Avatar
Wose extraordinaire

#6

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,483

Default 

January 8th, 2008, 18:23
Squeek, like a lot of us, has his own definition of RPG which I often fail to fully appreciate( in the sense of understand, not like or dislike) so I'll just say I have no idea what's meant there either.

I do agree that if the feeling of manipulation is too strong or marked by the kinds of thoughts Corwin presents, it could be disruptive to an extent. I don't think it indicates there's something inherently "wrong" with the game unless it's exceptionally clumsy. I think it indicates that the game is making an attempt to draw the player into the dev's intended script. As I said in my comments, I see that as more of a positive challenge than a negative limitation, but that's me.

Where there's smoke, there's mirrors.
Last edited by magerette; January 8th, 2008 at 23:49.
magerette is offline

magerette

magerette's Avatar
Hedgewitch

#7

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,929

Default 

January 8th, 2008, 18:56
In the first act of Witcher did I feel manipulated? No the choices I made were part of the overall flow of how I went through the story up to that point. Yes I helped the townspeople but through those acts their dirty secrets were reveled. Was Abigail a saint no not even close but I guess if you have a choice of only hanging a murderer or one who is an accessory to murder I would have to chose the former.
This is one of may mutually exclusive choices you run in to in Witcher, that is what makes it such a fun experience.
Terry is offline

Terry

Terry's Avatar
Watchdog

#8

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 108

Default 

January 8th, 2008, 18:57
Originally Posted by GhanBuriGhan View Post
The game making choice - Are you talking about a Dungeon Master AI, multiplayer, or even Pen & Paper? I couldn't quite follow your meaning here.
In single player computer games the only source of collaboration available is the software. So I'm saying the software needs to provide collaboration and that that collaboration should be genuine.

Why the heck not? There are some awfully smart people out there, walking around, who would be willing to give it a shot. I once knew a guy who studied and taught computer science, mathematics and physics at Oxford for almost twenty years. He had two doctorates, a masters and an undergraduate degree and was looking for a new job.

Maybe I have no business asserting this, since I don't program. But I think the products we're seeing are more the result of design decisions than technical limitations. People who write product plans for these games assess us and decide we'll be easily satisfied.

Some, like the folks over at Bethesda, get pretty smug about it. We should wise up and demand more.

Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. — [Joni Mitchell]
Squeek is offline

Squeek

Squeek's Avatar
connoisseur of tidbits

#9

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,807

Default 

January 8th, 2008, 23:42
As a case in point, many games have a certain "reactivity" when it comes to the game world: townspeople react when you clear out the kobold caves, or they'll offer a tidbit of customization if they've talked to you before - "Oh, it's you again. What do you want now, <charname>?" — but that's usually as far as the reactivity goes.

The Orc Army doesn't attack Inmesvale or set up camp in the Ruined Temple of Amaunator, if you've killed Firkraag or defeated the Shade Lord, respectively.

The instances of such reactivity need not be large, nor do they need be particularly well tied to the plot, nor would they even need to have far-reaching consequences. They need not be as complicated to program as a full-fledged romance, either. If you're lucky, you'll get a case where the army invading the Seer's camp in the underdark won't have mind flayers with it, if you've cleared out a certain area; very rarely can I think of a case where the reactivity of the game has been more proactive in nature.

That, I think, might be something worth exploring, if I were designing a game. I know the game is going to manipulate my actions: the more heavy plot-driven the game is, the more I'm going to be hemmed in, somehow. I accept that. If instead of giving me the feeling that it was merely the game designer doing the manipulating, though, I could feel like it was the antagonist that was doing the manipulating, I'd get a nifty little world-building illusion and an actually clever-seeming villain to boot, instead of the now-cliché "I'm too powerful to care about you, but when I do eventually realize that you're a threat to me, it'll be too late" passive Foozle. Mephistopheles in HotU was a manipulative villain, certainly, but it was utterly passive in relation to the PC. He never actually did anything to my character, or did anything in response to my character: his actions were set in stone no matter what I did. Every other game villain I can think of is exactly the same way.

One would have to choose one's events with care, I'd imagine, for subsets of reactions to all make sense within the current framework of the overall story, but I think it's something that could be done, particularly if such sets were kept small and their effects relatively localized…

… if one was interested in presenting a more reactive experience for the gamer. I don't see much evidence of that in the industry at present, though. If anything, story-driven games are tending more toward a movie-like experience.

Personally, I can still enjoy the regular Passive Foozle, and while the feeling of being manipulated by game designers, instead of something In Context, can be annoying, that feeling is mitigated by the inescapable knowledge of what I'm doing: Playing a game. I know it's not a real role-playing experience; it's a pre-programmed piece of software, and no matter how well they disguise it, there are only going to be so many things that I can do, and only so much influence I'm allowed to have. That's all right with me.

For now.

IamaGuest

Guest

#10

Posts: n/a

Default 

January 9th, 2008, 00:06
I know and recognize exactly what Corwin is talking about, while I don't think I make decisions that are in a direction opposite of my intended goal (always good or neutral). However, OH hell yes if I feel unfairly/insidiously manipulated after spending $50 I will screw with the game mechanics that wrongly force me to do something blatantly unfair.

I can see why Corwin would use the alternate choice as a method, since iirc Corwin has stated in the past, he won't ever start a game over until he has completed once, does not use codes and similar. Once I get to the point of recognizing it, I feel justified of going outside the game design since the developers are doing it.

After being frustrated about the same scene at the end of chapter 1,
Spoiler


So as entertainment at the end of chapter 2 fight, I had to replay it as yet another quest had broken in chapter 3 and knew I could beat it, so
Spoiler


Don't get me wrong there are fully acceptable developer manipulations, as PB in Gothic where key characters are invincible until they have played their major scenes. In The Witcher, I often found myself being unfairly manipulated another really good example is the Shani and Triss quest in chapter 3. I found it completely unbelievable and then Cd Projekt pissed me off when they berated me with the completely asinine response from the secondary choice. I can respect Cd Projekt for their talent and accomplishments but they start jacking me around trying to piss in my beer, that annoys me.

The Witcher set an idea/vision/goal to try to make no choice good or bad which could be seen as a very good goal. Many people like to point out how this is representative of real life and I disagree. I felt the unrealistic padding and could have forgiven them but they had to go and keep kicking us in the shins.
Instead of dealing in absolutes (nothing good or bad) they should have attempted amap, it would have been a much better flowing and balanced feeling game. They wouldn't have put all that false pressure on themselves, since many times their quests work very well in feeling and application. The game design was at it's best when it tried to unite instead of the lows when the game tried to divide.

Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language…they're not even real words as much as a succession of violent images.
Acleacius is offline

Acleacius

SasqWatch

#11

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,498

Default 

January 9th, 2008, 03:41
Personnally, I don't feel manipulated by the devs. However, I played many console RPGs where you never have any influence on the story to begin with. At best, when you are offered a choice, it's completely meaningless (like, for example, asking you if you wish to drink the tea that you know is drugged, then making you drink it even when you said no). There's also all those adventure games where you can only solve the puzzles in the single way that the designers decided…

So, when I'm playing a PC RPG, I feel I have much more freedom. When that freedom is more of an illusion in the end, I don't even notice it. What I do notice however is when the game react to the things I did, like the examples IamaGuest pointed out. Of course, I haven't played "The Witcher" yet (got the game, but not the PC that can run it), so maybe in that game there is more of a feeling of being manipulated than is usual in a PC RPG.

I believe it's all a question of perspective.

I live in my own little world, but it's okay, they know me there.

Dungeon Tales
Dantre is offline

Dantre

Dantre's Avatar
Watchdog

#12

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 113

Default 

January 9th, 2008, 09:32
Originally Posted by Squeek View Post
In single player computer games the only source of collaboration available is the software. So I'm saying the software needs to provide collaboration and that that collaboration should be genuine.
Maybe we do indeed need MORE not less manipulation. The idea of a Dungeon Master AI in games is a pet idea of mine. In my opinion, to become more dynamic and to please a wider variety of playing styles (and thus to remain both commercially successful as well as interesting to the hardcore) games need to become more active in adjusting themselves to the player. I imagine there could be a "meta AI" that constantly polls the players actions and adjusts the game in subtle ways to make the experience more interesting, just like a good DM does. For example, if a player wins all combat easily with hardly a scratch, it could slowly increase the number, level, or type of opponents, or even nudge up an invisible difficulty slider that affects the underlying stats. Or it could do the reverse if a player has to reload frequently. If a gamer rapidly clicks away all dialogue it could offer more simple (e.g. binary) choices, while a gamer that appears to read all dialogue fully and takes time to decide which option to pick could get additional options. If a gamer develops his character as a mage, the game could notice and change loot, monsters, and even quests to better support that playstyle (particularly useful for this would be to trigger quests that actively "come to the player", something the witcher does very well, e.g. the incident at Vivaldis Bank). And of course do the same for a fighting or stealth oriented character. A game could even use ingame dialogue to find out what the player likes - does he enjoy exploration, fighting, dialogue? Then give him more of that. Is he frustrated by running around a huge map? Then give him options to skip that.
And so on. I think more plasticity in the provided experience could be a huge boon for roleplaying games, and it does not have to be through endless options screens. In a way that means more manipulation, but it would be in the interest of the player.
GhanBuriGhan is offline

GhanBuriGhan

GhanBuriGhan's Avatar
Wose extraordinaire

#13

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,483

Default 

January 9th, 2008, 18:26
I like all of that! Let's take it even further! I'm imagining system participation, not just manipulation. It's what makes playing with your cat different from playing with your ball. The difference is the cat's collaboration. It's playing too.

Computers aren't alive, but they're smarter than a ball. There's a truism among actors that "acting is reacting." To hold up its end as a participant in a role-playing game, your computer should be reactive. That's the stuff I'd like to see get programmed in.

You know those stories where someone gets sent back in time? The ones where they're careful not to make any changes, because the slightest alteration might turn out to be huge? RPG needs worlds that work like that, worlds that react.

Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. — [Joni Mitchell]
Last edited by Squeek; January 9th, 2008 at 18:32.
Squeek is offline

Squeek

Squeek's Avatar
connoisseur of tidbits

#14

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,807

Default 

January 9th, 2008, 23:34
If you - as a dev - "manipulate" a player into some emotional reaction …

… THEN you - as a dev - must have a kind of prediction of the reaction or of the gamer's mind.

In principle, it's like Chess: You try to predict how the next one moves.

If you're good at psychology, you might even "play" with the feelings and emotions of peopple - and the most dangerous tricksters and schemers do that.
If you're an author - and The Witcher originally stems from a series of books, as I heard - then you can basically do the same with readers.

Build expectations … and then fulfill them - or not.

It's a bit like the oman coming and "rescuing" Brian.

Imho writers of horror novels are able to do this at best. They are "playing" on the emotional reactions like a piano-player on his or her piano.

“ Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius – and a lot of courage – to move in the opposite direction.“ (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)
Alrik Fassbauer is offline

Alrik Fassbauer

Alrik Fassbauer's Avatar
TL;DR

#15

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Old Europe
Posts: 15,987

Default 

January 10th, 2008, 05:39
Hehe, more manipulation? Why cause we all love to be told how to feel and think?

Another good example in oblivion, since I don't want seem like I am picking on The Witcher, is during the Fighter Guild questline. Early in the quest you are asked to help…..
Spoiler

which you are required to do. Then later you are first required to…..
Spoiler


Know why? It's clearly because Hyst only effects villagers and sheep, duh! We can just never get enough of those good o'le affected quests and so I did what any murderer would do, I Resurrected them with the console. It fit so nicely with the developers vision and story, now who could resist the fun?

Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language…they're not even real words as much as a succession of violent images.
Acleacius is offline

Acleacius

SasqWatch

#16

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,498

Default 

January 10th, 2008, 06:39
I never did that quest, so I don't think it was the fighters guild!!

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#17

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,497
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin

Default 

January 10th, 2008, 08:56
It was the ……….
Spoiler

There are many like this in oblivion as often you are never really allowed to make choices you are forced on rails on almost every quest. In fairness I know most quests try to give the illusion of choice like Deus Ex or others but bethseda doesn't seem much like they advocate choice at all, sadly.

Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language…they're not even real words as much as a succession of violent images.
Acleacius is offline

Acleacius

SasqWatch

#18

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,498

Default 

January 13th, 2008, 00:56
I have to admit that I did not feel overly manipulated. After all the programmers implemented choice… why would they try to manipulate me? If they wanted me to chose one particular "path" they could just force me to do it by leaving me no other choice.

I think manipulation makes only sense if the outcome of your decision is different than you expected… because only then it creates this "Uff" effect. In the case of Abigail that's only partly the case I guess. Ok, the card that you'll get if you sleep with her implies that she's not as innocent as she seems to be, but that doesn't make the Reverend a more sympathetical person. He and the rest of the bunch are still wankers and you hardly feel any regret that you killed them.

Mein Warhammer Online Review auf
http://www.moxiblog.com
Ionstormsucks is offline

Ionstormsucks

Ionstormsucks's Avatar
Major Villain

#19

Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 760

Default 

January 13th, 2008, 01:34
But that's part of the issue!! WHY wasn't the Rev made a more sympathetic character? Why was he made SO odious??

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#20

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,497
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » RPGWatch Side Quest - Manipulation and Perversion
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 19:23.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch