Impossidog

subtlety in dialogue?

Recommended Posts

Binary Domain starts with some fun Blade Runner-eque ideas about people masquerading as machines, but it didn't really go anywhere interesting with it. The characters are mostly cliches that are weirdly endearing but they don't make up for the by the numbers gears of war clone gameplay.

 

I always attributed bad writing in games to the fact that, historically at least, they're often written by people who came up in the industry as game designers/programmers, not writers. Or a professional writer is brought in who doesn't really understand how to write for games. I think the industry is still working out the best ways to integrate story and mechanics for various genres. And let's be honest, for many big productions, writing takes a back seat to having big set pieces that get blown up for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People gave David Cage a lot of shit for talking about how the power of next-gen will let us do things we couldn't before, saying that we don't need super HD graphics for a good story, but I think that's only partly true. 

 

A lot of people in this thread have cited the excellent subtlety in the Last of Us. Yes, that game is expertly written, but it also does something video games have struggled with for years--it lets the images tell the story too. Whenever I go to SCBWI conferences, I hear that same lesson pounded into new children's book writers: leave room for the illustrations. It's the same in games.

 

Remember when Metal Gear Solid came out? We all thought it was this huge achievement in cinematic gaming, and it sort of was. Few other games (at the time) had in-depth fully-voiced stories with long dramatic in-engine cutscenes. Back then, Kojima's ham-fisted writing wasn't as noticeable, because it carried the story. There was little room for subtlety in those blocky, non-emotive faces. Now, it's a little more annoying, because we have the graphic fidelity to imply meaning. And instead, Kojima spells out every centimeter of story. That's where many modern video games struggle.

 

The Last of Us uses subtle looks, shoulder shrugs (body language!), lighting, and more to imply meaning. Doing all that takes a lot of work, but the pay off is huge. I think people mistakenly refer to that game as cinematic, but it's not, it's just closer to how real humans interact. We leave things unsaid, we imply meanings, we misuse words. While you can still get that subtlety from a Fallout 3 style talking head close-up, it's more difficult--takes more work on the part of the writer. Instead it's easier to just go, "screw it, let's just have this guy say, 'I'M ANGRY!' that will get the message across."

 

I would love to see more games with subtle writing. Stories that leave a little more on the table are inherently more interesting (though you can go in the opposite direction and leave out too much, then call it "mysterious." It's a hard line to walk). 

 

I rounded up some good subtle examples just for funsies. These are from AAA games, which to me is more surprising, because with all the bombast associated with them, you'd think subtlety would be lost.

 

Look how flustered the crew is in this

clip. The writing, voice acting and character animation work together to sell the scene.

 

There's another scene in that game where the pig guy and Monkey exchange looks about the girl, suggesting a potential romance. In the past a game script writer might have thrown lines in. This writer obviously trusted the animators and voice actors, and probably wrote in something like, "Pig guy motions with his head to girl, gives Monkey a wink. Monkey rolls his eyes in mock exasperation, but considers the idea. Could this relationship be more than what it seems?"

 

Ubisoft consistently creates excellent cinematics packed with subtlety.

is a joy to watch. Look at his body language, the way he talks, the way it seems like he obviously knows more than Edward without ever stating it explicitly.

 

There's one scene I couldn't find that has Edward on a pier talking to James, who is on his ship. As the ship sails away, James walks forward on the ship to stay face to face with Edward. Eventually he runs out of ship and sails away, cutting off their conversation. That could have easily been a scene of two people just chatting on a pier, standing and waving their arms. I appreciate that they went above and beyond for it, just to illustrate once again, James Kidd has something up his sleeve, and is not at all flustered by Edward's destructive swagger. 

 

And finally, the opening cinematic to the upcoming The Last of Us DLC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsAvKMEIOTI

 

Not much to add there--Naughty Dog has this stuff down. The trepidation on Ellie's face, the air of uneasiness you feel between these two, it's all communicated beautifully through the images, words, lighting and acting. 

 

Sorry for the mega post. I just really love when games go the extra mile. I feel like some people are so quick to write off AAA games, when there are obviously people working on those mega teams that really care about subtlety, and I'm glad they do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AC4 had some great dialogue and might be the only AC worth anything really.

 

I need to replay Enslaved, one of the most life changing experiences I have had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this sarcasm? I've not played Binary Domain, but from what I've read it looks pretty weak (plus it's Sega. I'm not much of a Sega fan). If it's not sarcasm maybe it's something I should try out.

 

It's not the pinnacle of writing in games no, but it's a weirdly endearing game. I don't know how to describe it other than to say it's very Japanese. It juxtaposes extreme campiness (that I think's intentional) with grim moments like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRP0Ha9ok4o

 

It reflects that mechanically as well. It's got surprisingly fun combat (it gets better when your rifle is upgraded a bit) but it mixes in this nonsensical relationship mechanic where your squad gains approval of you when you headshot lots of robos (which is followed by very campy random exclamations of approval from them). You can also diss/approve of jokes they make and your relationship status affects the ending. It's fucking weird. For whatever reason though, all that kind of works. I ended up really liking the game (I replayed it right after finishing it) but I understand if people think it's just the worst. It probably took at least two hours before I warmed up to it and another two before I was willing to admit that I enjoyed it non-ironically. Also, it's surprisingly refreshing to just shoot terminator robots instead of gunning down a thousand humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I really didn't like Binary Domain, it's a very polarizing game. I really disliked the relationship system and didn't felt the story was anything special. Tha gameplay was ok, but it got way too repetitive over the time.

About Enslaved, I bought it on steam and I'm replaying it now. It's a really great game, nice story and a really subtle character development. The voice acting is superb, you could expect that from Andy serkis, but the girl (can't remember her name, jus that she did some series on Nickelodeon or something) did a great job, it would be nice to see her in other games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that you brought up Enslaved, I expected little from it but even from the demo I was convinced I had to play it. The writing and acting is super good in it. (unfortunately due to a shitty PC port I still haven't finished it). That Last of Us DLC trailer too, I remember Ellie being very realistic but the other girl seemed EVEN better in this one.

 

For my graduation project I did some research into dialogue systems and such (you can read more here if you like), and while I don't feel like I found a great solution I can see the industry moving away from the problem areas I indentified, like long lists of responses as if you're filling out a questionnaire, the infinite waiting between responses, being nailed to the ground for the entire conversation etc. It's the subtle things like body language that we can do now.

 

More to the point of the writing in general, I've always been a fan of environmental storytelling, letting someone figure stuff out for themselves. Gone Home and The Swapper did that really well, as does Broken Age to an extent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Binary Domain is a great game, the story has its moment. I found the ending to be so campy that it ruined a lot of the experience for me.

 

 

I haven't played The Stanley Parable yet, but does anyone know what the dialogue in that game is like? it may be the least subtle or the most from the demo I played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the demo for the Stanley Parable gives you a pretty good idea of how the game plays. The writing isn't that outstanding I would say, but at some point it starts fucking with your head and I always enjoy that, especially down some of the more obscure paths.
 
I particularly liked

when replaying a certain path through the level a few times I knew where the switch to the hidden door was and went to press it, and the narrator said "hang on speedy gonzales, you're rushing, here's a minute of classical music to calm you down"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The writing's not overly subtle in The Stanley Parable unless your definition of subtlety is just "implies things that it does not outright say," in which case it's extremely subtle. But I think things can be unsubtly implied, which is what I think The Stanley Parable does, but even that depends on my belief that my reading of the game is more or less the obvious one, and to the extent my reading is contested, then what The Stanley Parable is doing is to that degree subtle, because not everyone gets what I get out of it (if that is indeed the case).

Now I'm realizing, though, that we've gone two pages without talking about what subtlety is, which is pretty silly. When I think "subtle" I usually think "there are layers to what is going on that are not obviously apparent," and subtle dialog is thus dialog that communicates more than just the bare meaning and obvious implications of what is said. So, for instance, in The Walking Dead episode 3 or 4 or something, when you first meet whatshisname and whatshername, the couple on the bride, there's what I consider some moderately subtle dialog about

How the lady is pregnant

because that is implied but not outright stated and it's possible to miss the implication. But as I pointed out above, subtlety isn't just about implying what isn't outright stated and the obvious implications of this. It's also about how obviously it implies these things, how many things it implies, how it implies them, and so on.

But there's another aspect to subtlety (maybe even another term which uses the same word, "subtle," but means something else), which is "draws fine distinctions." So, for instance, if we're having a discussion, and I draw out a distinction that was latent and that people had missed, you would call the point I made "a subtle point." Maybe I'm making a subtle point in this post by bringing this issue up, for instance.

In that case, even fewer games have subtle dialog, because game dialog is typically pretty to the point and simple. Few games want to get into complicated issues - even games that deal with complex topics, like The Swapper or Spec Ops: The Line treat their points either lightly or with a cudgel - they don't dig deep either because they skim the surface or because they didactically push one point of view.

One game I'd say is subtle in both ways is Dear Esther, although more so in the first way than the second. Kentucky Route Zero, The Entertainment, and Limits & Demonstrations are subtle in both ways, sublimely so in fact. Very few games are subtle in the second way and I'd almost be tempted to write off that notion of subtlety entirely except that I think it's inextricably linked to the first notion, because just as we must draw subtle distinctions to decipher subtle-in-the-first-sense dialog, subtle-in-the-second-sense dialog is, if it's not dreadfully boring, is typically subtle in the first sense too, because it's just flat out good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Subtlety isn't really a strong point for most games out today. If they're not screaming at you constantly, then they're filling your screen with enough noise to make your head spin. But a few are bringing it back. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Subtlety isn't really a strong point for most games out today. If they're not screaming at you constantly, then they're filling your screen with enough noise to make your head spin. But a few are bringing it back. 

 

 

I still really like the Indoctrination Theory for Mass Effect3

 

Whether or not it completely checks out is kinda irrelevant to me. I am able to revisit a lot of my experiences in the Mass Effect games with a twisty perspective with this interesting thesis.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually playing through Binary domain now as it happens, and there is a lot of camp in it as you might expect.  I classify it as the kind of "I'd watch that movie if it were on TV" quality of a game--it's not going to light your world on fire but it's good for what it is.  The one thing I'm actually enjoying quite a bit are the responses to various exposition bits in the game.  Between cover shooting sections one of your squad members will mention something to you and you can select a response.  What is interesting to me about these is that in each case there is usually a positive response, a negative response, and then a third response where you can just be completely dismissive of the person talking to you.  The end result I believe is effectively the same as choosing the negative response in terms of what data the game tracks, but it does create a weird dynamic that I've had a bit of fun with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very fond of Binary Domain - but the only subtlety comes from the dialogue between the two Japanese cops that get thrown into the middle of the plot for no reason:

 

http://www.arcadianrhythms.com/2012/04/binary-domain-review/

 

I kind of agree though, I reckon that developers should focus more on environmental story telling instead of going 'Yeah, chuck some dialogue in there'.

 

I also love Spec Ops: The Line, if you read some of the interviews at what is being implied in the game - I had a totally different read on the situation so, yeah, there is subtlety in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Games are pretty terrible with subtlety. I'm not really sure that the video posted is a particularly good example, though. Briefly: in it, the guy refers to a game in which the player is obviously walking into a trap. And it isn't subtle at all. The game then punishes the player for going into the trap by killing them. This is cute, but games that "punish" the player for playing them are using cheap gimmicks, not actually teaching the player. To avoid the trap is to avoid the game, which is antithetical to the very idea of playing a game. Such a path ignores that many will understand that it is a trap, but are going in with that understanding in order to win a battle.

 

I think that the biggest problem is that games haven't really learned from the open text (or writerly text, as Barthes calls it), which is one in which there is not a meaning to be gleaned through reading/playing, but rather, it is one in which there are a multiplicity of valid interpretations, but they must be constructed by the reader/player (Barthes distinguishes the writerly as needing to be "written" by the reader through the act of connecting and building the components of the writing, so that they are active in the creation of meaning, whereas the readerly text is entirely written by the writer, and the reader simply receives it). This should obviously be done through things like dialog that is more subtle, but also through environmental storytelling and gameplay mechanics that compliment the narrative impulses. 

 

Honestly, my very very favorite example of this was the ending to the much maligned 2008 reboot Prince of Persia game (the cel shaded one with Nolan North voicing the prince). The main plot of the game that you find out is that the girl, Elika, had died, but that her father, unable to bear her loss, made a deal with the evil entity Ahriman--setting it free in exchange for bring Elika back to life. You fight the corruption around the area, then you and Elika go in to finish off Ahriman--bantering as you progress through the game, and growing closer to each other (and the writing here, while portraying the "Prince" as an annoying bro, does a great job of making their relationship move realistically from annoyance to genuine affection)--Elika reveals that the only way to defeat the evil is to sacrifice herself, which she does. The game ends with you carrying out her body and then wandering aimlessly, with Ahriman whispering that you can save her until you let the evil out again in order to bring her back to life. You literally cannot do anything other than bring her back. This frustrating, horrible ending is the best possible way of literalizing the emotional stake of the character, that you can't just give up (turn off the game), and you would rather unleash an evil on the world, but have Elika back with you than to leave things as they were. Granted, it's not a particularly open text, but there are a few possible readings (this is mine, obviously), and it does it in a way that makes the theme of the game (love that cannot give up on a person to disastrous ends) implicit rather than explicit. And it's something that few games have replicated.

 

Because subtlety is a HUGE risk. It alienates many people. Honestly, the smartest thing Braid did was give the player an incorrect explicit ending (the lost relationship) while laying a LOT of groundwork for a more interesting, implicit theme that almost no one understood until it was finally explained to them. That way, it didn't piss off the people who didn't understand the game, but it was still able to be something more than a simplistic, literal explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now