- Joined
- Nov 30, 2014
- Messages
- 240
- Reaction score
- 167
- First Language
- Engrish
- Primarily Uses
^^^ Somebody knows a thing or two about Psychology ^^^
*Liked* because of the mention of Suspension of Disbelief.
Another thing that could be mentioned is the Uncanny Valley. Basically, the more that characters appear to be lifelike, the more they appeal to the audience. And that goes up until you reach a certain point, then that likability falls off a cliff. Literally, that cliff leads you into the Uncanny Valley, where something is a closer approximation of human, but to the point where it becomes "creepy". For example, at the bottom end of the list, we would have Stick Figures. Higher on the list would be Cartoons, followed by Sprites, then CG in Disney movies and Polygonal Characters. Not believable enough to fall into that Uncanny Valley. What would fall into the Uncanny Valley would be something like a Japanese Sexbot. They are just flat out creepy. But that Likability goes back up once you become truly lifelike. So Film CGI, when done properly, reaches the other end of that Uncanny Valley where things are Likable and not creepy again. For example, in shots that are done with CGI because the action is not possible to do. If they are done poorly, for example, real life vs the Scorpion King in the second Mummy flick, or Neo in the 2nd flick where he had a big fight with thousands of Agent Smiths. They read as Uncanny, and the films suffered as a result. But done correctly and the audience literally can not tell the difference between the real life version of the actor and a CGI version of the same actor. A good example might be Iron Man. Regardless of your opinion of the film, you probably dont feel that the character fell into that Uncanny, or "Creepy" area of interpretation.
The more we add in the mundane rituals of real life, the closer we push towards that Uncanny Valley. We make quick assumptions about the world the character is in and our subconscious fills in the blanks for us. If we needed every detail filled in, we would quickly assume that every character in every RPG smells terrible because they never bathe or brush their teeth. Excluding these details allows us to advance the story quickly enough through implied assumptions that players dont get bored. Press X to brush your teeth. We dont need to do that to have a game. Most of these details are best excluded, and make for a better game.
I think Gamers want gameplay to focus on what is different in reality and the game world. Werewolves most likely have to poop. But since that exists in both worlds, we can easily skip that detail because it is assumed, and focus on what is different. A werewolf character, since it was mentioned, would focus on things that are important to them. Feeding, Lunar Cycle, and consequences of being a werewolf. The interest of the audience is held by focusing on what is different over what is the same. If we were to create a game based completely on what is the same in the real world and the game world, the audience would lose interest. Werewolfs, while in human form, most likely have ten fingers, ten toes, two eyes, two ears, etc. Focusing on those detais because of the similarity can make an audience very bored.
Gamers play games for the same reason as people watch fictional tv programs or movies or fictional books. It is an Escape from Reality. In order to pull off that Escapism, we actively try to avoid what is common between Reality and Fiction and focus only on what is different. Not only does it make for efficient storytelling, it focuses on what needs to be focused on. In this fictional story, this character says this and does this and reacts to that character in such a way. Realistic, but it is different than reality because that character is not real, thus, that characters behaviors and actions are focused on because they are fictional, yet, true to their enviornment. In order to progress these fictional stories, it is the fictional elements that are focused on the most. Everything else can be assumed through the acceptable breaks from reality.
We can also focus too heavily on specific topics while neglecting other topics. Here is a fictional spoon. Then follow the fictional history of the spoon, the audience loses interest. Spoon was sold on X date for X price by X person to X person who first used X spoon to consume X food and was cleaned at X time. We dont give a crap. The fiction we seek is what is interesting in the fictional enviornment. Murder Mystery will focus on character interaction and details relevant to the death of X character and challenges the audience to discover "who dun it". This is when the details are important. But overdone, we lose interest, underdone can be just as bad. There is a balance.
So what constitues an "Acceptable Break from Reality"? What ever we can assume. I'll try the very first "Wake Up Late" cliche again.
"Ralph!"
"Ralph!"
"Wake up, Ralph!"
"You're late for School!"
"Thanks, Mom!"
"Hurry up, your breakfast is getting cold!"
Now, lets focus on what is assumed and not specifically mentioned:
- Character is not naked
- Character does not stink
- Character lives in a world with Gravity
- Character has eaten the mentioned breakfast without requiring player activity
- Character knows where he lives
- Character has relationship with people where he lives
- Character breathes air
- Character has combed their hair
- Character has made their bed, paid their bills, done most of their non quest related chores
- Character lives in a universe where the Sun provides the natural light
These things are all assumed by the audience because they are commonalities between the fictional universe and real life, thus, do not need to be addressed. This is "Reading Between the Lines". The audience will fill in the unmentioned details of the characters with their own psyche. This is known as Projection. It helps to create a bond with the audience and the character as long as the character has enough in common with specific members of the audience. It also plays heavily on what certain members of the audience would do in a fictional enviornment, provided the focused fictional details of the audience is changed. This is what I would do if I could fly or had a sword or could cast magic. Stories focus so heavily on assumptions that probably 99% of the story is imagined by the audience, and we just get the visual and audio fluff that allows to be aware of how the actions of the character affect the enviornment. The main character or characters of a story are usually diverse enough that a player or observer will be able to connect with at least one member in a group of characters.
For example, in Final Fantasy XIII, most players were expected to project themselves on to the character of Hope. This is also why intended projection sometimes goes horribly awry. God of War also used projection. Your character is a$$hole, and oddly, it came across much better received than Final Fantasy XIII. TO compare the two characters of Hope vs Kratos, people connected better with Kratos because, although he was pretty much a troubled a$$h01e, he remained true to his character. You are the son of a god and can kick ass and take names. Here are some weapons and these jerks are in your way. The result is button mashing goodness to murder as many people and monsters as you can achieve in as short of a time as you can. Hope failed miserably because most people do not have that weak of a psyche and as a result, players did not connect with Hope. Sure, there may be some sympathy for what he experienced, but at the same time, he was so annoying I just wanted to slap him upside the head and tell him to get over his sissy-la-la-ness and quit behaving on the "woe is me" character. It was too much of a consequence of Hope's character being too heavily focused on, and the character did not resonate with players. Kratos, on the other hand, the player became the rear end in a top hat character that Kratos was designed to be, thus, the player was responsible for the actions of Kratos which resonated better with the player. And for the record, Kratos never had a bad hair day as Cloud Strife probably had many.
Superfluous details vs meaningful deviations from reality that players like. Almost every single one of these deviations has already been categoriezed and has become a cliche. In the end, every story is exactly the same when stripped down of all the detailes and brought to its core, and the story is simply that things change.
This is a topic that will continue to evolve, forever. Storytelling is an art, and everyone has something to contribute. Many types of storytelling will be based on the goal of the writer. Some people dont write stories for others to play, they just want to explore the possibilities of situations. Other writers have other goals. Most probably intend to entertain a small audience. Once you introduce money as a possible side effect, writers start to think heavily about how to satisfy the maximum number of people and learn how to tell a story in a way that accomplishes their goals. You end up with Target Audience and as a result, the dreaded Cliche.
Again, it isnt that a Cliche is good or bad. There will always be Cliches. All that really matters is if your story is done in such a way that you are satisfied with your goals as a storyteller.
*Liked* because of the mention of Suspension of Disbelief.
Another thing that could be mentioned is the Uncanny Valley. Basically, the more that characters appear to be lifelike, the more they appeal to the audience. And that goes up until you reach a certain point, then that likability falls off a cliff. Literally, that cliff leads you into the Uncanny Valley, where something is a closer approximation of human, but to the point where it becomes "creepy". For example, at the bottom end of the list, we would have Stick Figures. Higher on the list would be Cartoons, followed by Sprites, then CG in Disney movies and Polygonal Characters. Not believable enough to fall into that Uncanny Valley. What would fall into the Uncanny Valley would be something like a Japanese Sexbot. They are just flat out creepy. But that Likability goes back up once you become truly lifelike. So Film CGI, when done properly, reaches the other end of that Uncanny Valley where things are Likable and not creepy again. For example, in shots that are done with CGI because the action is not possible to do. If they are done poorly, for example, real life vs the Scorpion King in the second Mummy flick, or Neo in the 2nd flick where he had a big fight with thousands of Agent Smiths. They read as Uncanny, and the films suffered as a result. But done correctly and the audience literally can not tell the difference between the real life version of the actor and a CGI version of the same actor. A good example might be Iron Man. Regardless of your opinion of the film, you probably dont feel that the character fell into that Uncanny, or "Creepy" area of interpretation.
The more we add in the mundane rituals of real life, the closer we push towards that Uncanny Valley. We make quick assumptions about the world the character is in and our subconscious fills in the blanks for us. If we needed every detail filled in, we would quickly assume that every character in every RPG smells terrible because they never bathe or brush their teeth. Excluding these details allows us to advance the story quickly enough through implied assumptions that players dont get bored. Press X to brush your teeth. We dont need to do that to have a game. Most of these details are best excluded, and make for a better game.
I think Gamers want gameplay to focus on what is different in reality and the game world. Werewolves most likely have to poop. But since that exists in both worlds, we can easily skip that detail because it is assumed, and focus on what is different. A werewolf character, since it was mentioned, would focus on things that are important to them. Feeding, Lunar Cycle, and consequences of being a werewolf. The interest of the audience is held by focusing on what is different over what is the same. If we were to create a game based completely on what is the same in the real world and the game world, the audience would lose interest. Werewolfs, while in human form, most likely have ten fingers, ten toes, two eyes, two ears, etc. Focusing on those detais because of the similarity can make an audience very bored.
Gamers play games for the same reason as people watch fictional tv programs or movies or fictional books. It is an Escape from Reality. In order to pull off that Escapism, we actively try to avoid what is common between Reality and Fiction and focus only on what is different. Not only does it make for efficient storytelling, it focuses on what needs to be focused on. In this fictional story, this character says this and does this and reacts to that character in such a way. Realistic, but it is different than reality because that character is not real, thus, that characters behaviors and actions are focused on because they are fictional, yet, true to their enviornment. In order to progress these fictional stories, it is the fictional elements that are focused on the most. Everything else can be assumed through the acceptable breaks from reality.
We can also focus too heavily on specific topics while neglecting other topics. Here is a fictional spoon. Then follow the fictional history of the spoon, the audience loses interest. Spoon was sold on X date for X price by X person to X person who first used X spoon to consume X food and was cleaned at X time. We dont give a crap. The fiction we seek is what is interesting in the fictional enviornment. Murder Mystery will focus on character interaction and details relevant to the death of X character and challenges the audience to discover "who dun it". This is when the details are important. But overdone, we lose interest, underdone can be just as bad. There is a balance.
So what constitues an "Acceptable Break from Reality"? What ever we can assume. I'll try the very first "Wake Up Late" cliche again.
"Ralph!"
"Ralph!"
"Wake up, Ralph!"
"You're late for School!"
"Thanks, Mom!"
"Hurry up, your breakfast is getting cold!"
Now, lets focus on what is assumed and not specifically mentioned:
- Character is not naked
- Character does not stink
- Character lives in a world with Gravity
- Character has eaten the mentioned breakfast without requiring player activity
- Character knows where he lives
- Character has relationship with people where he lives
- Character breathes air
- Character has combed their hair
- Character has made their bed, paid their bills, done most of their non quest related chores
- Character lives in a universe where the Sun provides the natural light
These things are all assumed by the audience because they are commonalities between the fictional universe and real life, thus, do not need to be addressed. This is "Reading Between the Lines". The audience will fill in the unmentioned details of the characters with their own psyche. This is known as Projection. It helps to create a bond with the audience and the character as long as the character has enough in common with specific members of the audience. It also plays heavily on what certain members of the audience would do in a fictional enviornment, provided the focused fictional details of the audience is changed. This is what I would do if I could fly or had a sword or could cast magic. Stories focus so heavily on assumptions that probably 99% of the story is imagined by the audience, and we just get the visual and audio fluff that allows to be aware of how the actions of the character affect the enviornment. The main character or characters of a story are usually diverse enough that a player or observer will be able to connect with at least one member in a group of characters.
For example, in Final Fantasy XIII, most players were expected to project themselves on to the character of Hope. This is also why intended projection sometimes goes horribly awry. God of War also used projection. Your character is a$$hole, and oddly, it came across much better received than Final Fantasy XIII. TO compare the two characters of Hope vs Kratos, people connected better with Kratos because, although he was pretty much a troubled a$$h01e, he remained true to his character. You are the son of a god and can kick ass and take names. Here are some weapons and these jerks are in your way. The result is button mashing goodness to murder as many people and monsters as you can achieve in as short of a time as you can. Hope failed miserably because most people do not have that weak of a psyche and as a result, players did not connect with Hope. Sure, there may be some sympathy for what he experienced, but at the same time, he was so annoying I just wanted to slap him upside the head and tell him to get over his sissy-la-la-ness and quit behaving on the "woe is me" character. It was too much of a consequence of Hope's character being too heavily focused on, and the character did not resonate with players. Kratos, on the other hand, the player became the rear end in a top hat character that Kratos was designed to be, thus, the player was responsible for the actions of Kratos which resonated better with the player. And for the record, Kratos never had a bad hair day as Cloud Strife probably had many.
Superfluous details vs meaningful deviations from reality that players like. Almost every single one of these deviations has already been categoriezed and has become a cliche. In the end, every story is exactly the same when stripped down of all the detailes and brought to its core, and the story is simply that things change.
This is a topic that will continue to evolve, forever. Storytelling is an art, and everyone has something to contribute. Many types of storytelling will be based on the goal of the writer. Some people dont write stories for others to play, they just want to explore the possibilities of situations. Other writers have other goals. Most probably intend to entertain a small audience. Once you introduce money as a possible side effect, writers start to think heavily about how to satisfy the maximum number of people and learn how to tell a story in a way that accomplishes their goals. You end up with Target Audience and as a result, the dreaded Cliche.
Again, it isnt that a Cliche is good or bad. There will always be Cliches. All that really matters is if your story is done in such a way that you are satisfied with your goals as a storyteller.
