I just finished playing Fallout 3. Or rather, my first play through of Fallout 3. For Fallout 3 is one of the increasing new breed of video games that has what I call Limited Non-Linear storytelling. It’s not the pinnacle of storytelling that video games can achieve, but it’s pretty much the best you can get right now with much depth.
There are three broad categories of video game storytelling that I see in games. They are what I call Linear, Limited Non-Linear, and True Non-Linear. Each one has its strengths and weaknesses and has varying degrees of usage in video games.
Linear storytelling is the most traditional style. Not coincidentally, this is also the storytelling style used in most traditional storytelling mediums, such as novels and movies. It basically tells a story with no real player interaction in it. When playing a game with a linear storytelling style, it’s a lot like reading a novel where you have to complete small tasks in order to turn the page.
The traditional Japanese RPG employs a linear storytelling style. The Final Fantasy series are the Xenosaga series exemplify the linear storytelling style. What sidequests there are in the game are generally promoted as being bonuses, adding special items and abilities but little to the story. If there are optional playable characters, they generally play no part in the plot. If there are multiple endings, there is little the player does to bring them about, it usually being related to a minor choice that only affects the ending, not the path to get there.
The stories themselves may be quite good (see Final Fantasy VI or Shadow Hearts: Covenant), but linear stories really fail to take advantage of the interactive nature of video games to evoke an emotional impact. The characters in the game are given their personalities and they are stuck with it. The player’s actions have little impact on what happens, if they do not follow the dangling carrot of the plot, it doesn’t move forward.
This style does have its strengths, though. Individual characterization is easier, as the developers know which characters are going to be focuses on and can focus their writing toward them. The main character especially can have depth that often isn’t possible in non-linear games.
For a long time, this was the only style of storytelling in games. The main limitation was storage space. There wasn’t enough storage available to add meaningful choice to a game. But this is no longer the case.
Now many games fall into the Limited Non-Linear category. Many people just use the term “Non-Linear”, because the games do not follow the same narrative structure of linear games. Players have choices and these choices have meaning. It can be as basic as making a few choices early in the game which impact the game later, or making moral choices through the game that affect objectives are completed and how NPCs react to you.
But in the end, you don’t actually change the plot or the goals of the character. You still have a singular endgame goal in sight. Using the earlier Fallout 3 example, no matter what choices your character makes or what sidequests you finish, in the end, you follow your father around. Sure, you can make choices that affect the fine details of the plot, and make choices that alter which ending you get. But the ending and plot all revolve around the same plot points.
In a Limited Non-Linear game, you can’t really change the goals of your character. In Mass Effect, you still try to destroy Sovereign and stop the Reapers invasion, no matter if you’re a Paragon or a Renegade. In Planescape: Torment, you still try to find out your past, no matter if you’re an evil thug or an enlightened warrior.
For the most part, Western RPGs fall into this category, though some Japanese RPGs are using this model as well. The Limited Non-Linear’s main strength is that it involves the player much deeper in the story. The choices force the player to step into the character’s shoes. To varying degrees, the line between the character and player is blurred. It makes emotional attachments that much stronger.
Additionally, this storytelling style greatly increases replayability. The more decisions a player can make - and the greater impact it has on the game and story - the more reason the player has for playing the game a second or third time. I know I’ve played through many games immediately after completing them just to see the way my choices can change the game. I’ve never done this with linear games, which I generally only replay some down the road, the same way I’d rewatch a good movie or reread a good book.
The biggest drawback of the Limited Non-Linear storytelling style (aside from the lack of true interaction, as stated earlier) is the extra difficulty it places on creating truly deep characters. The more choices you give, the more writing needs to be done to cover character reactions, and the less amount of response will be seen in a single playthrough.
The characters in Fallout 3 were, for the most part, quite simple and without depth. The most deep character is the player’s father, and even he only gets limited screentime and has little personality outside his “Save the world” mindset. Other NPCs are worse, with even the major ones rather flat.
That’s not to say it can’t be done. Mass Effect had fairly well developed characters all around. It’s just more difficult to pull off. And there is some trade-off as, in Mass Effect, the main character’s personality is more narrowly defined than it is in Fallout 3.
The final category of game storytelling is a True Non-Linear style. I haven’t encountered any games like this yet, but from what I’ve read of Fable 2, it might be the first one to really pull it off. A True Non-Linear game would require a story where the player decides his own goals.
Imagine if, in Fallout 3, there was a way to forget about finding your father and make something else the end-game goal. Perhaps founding a new settlement in the Wasteland and protecting it from Super Mutants. Perhaps eradicating the Brotherhood of Steel. Perhaps you never leave the Vault and instead stay there and eventually make your way up to the level of Overseer.
Of course, the technology doesn’t currently exist for a game to truly have an infinite number of possibilities. But if there’s a variety of plotlines to choose from, ones that don’t necessarily interact, and there are different end game triggers, that’s a step in the right direction.
So far, the most Non-Linear storytelling I’ve seen in a game places a quest in front of the player and offers numerous ways to complete it. The next step, I think, is letting the player pick a quest and offering various ways of completing it. It would add one more level of immersion into the game play experience. No longer would players simply have someone else’s goal to strive toward, they’d have one of their own choosing to go after.
The technology to allow this is little different from the technology that does Limited Non-Linear storytelling. We just need someone to make the game first.
