The Language of Videogames: Part 7 Fluency and Enjoyment

(I almost thought I would not make it to the end).

Almost a year ago now my friend and I were playing Journey. I had invited her over for the specific purpose of playing the game. Hey babe, come over to my place and let’s play videogames. I am a classy guy. No matter how self-deprecating my humor may be something did happen that day, an idea formed. First a question: Just how do we understand videogames and how in turn does that affect our experience with them? Then an answer: Videogames are a language. 

The player learns this language through similar ways in which they would learn anything else. They begin with Observation, Experimentation and Response. After that the player begins to Apply Assumptions made in one game to another. From that an understanding of the “Win-State” is formed. After the ludic elements of the game have been comprehended the narrative elements begin to form within the player’s understanding. Narrative Significance takes shape followed by Ludonarrative Comprehension; are the ludic and narrative elements of the game dissonant or resonant? Once all these pieces of understanding are in place the player finds themselves with a Combined Understanding of the entire game experience. The player can engage with the developer in the language common to both of them: the language of videogames.   

Like all languages practice makes perfect. Fluency develops over time and repeated exposure to the language. Beyond more in depth study of game theory there is nothing that can be done to make someone more fluent in the language of videogames. The only option is to play the games. And once the player has become fluent they will most likely not even recognize it. True fluency goes unnoticed. Everything the player has learned and every cognitive thought developed by study works to provide the player with fluency. It is not a conscious process unless deeply examined. Once the player has become fluent everything will just work and they won’t even notice it.

Or perhaps they will notice that they are having fun. The one side effect of fluency in the language of videogames is immense enjoyment. No longer will the player get turned around or lost. Feelings of discomfort and aggravation at a game disappear. Because the player is fluent in the language of videogames their experience is greatly increased. It becomes apparent to the player what the developer’s intention was with the game. The player is able to engage in the game world as an equal with the developer. They both are fluent, fully understanding what one is saying to the other. Videogames are artistic, creative expressions at the forefront of modern innovation. They are also meant to fun. Fluency benefits the player by increasing their enjoyment with the game.

There is one last thing I want to say on this topic. The best way to become fluent in any language is to immerse yourself in that language. So go out and play some videogames!  

The Language of Videogames: Part 6 Combined Understanding

Previously I mentioned how the future of videogames lay within ludonarrative resonance, the seamless melding of story and gameplay. The idea was briefly mentioned and championed. Yet, a further look into the realities of how narrative and ludic elements can be combined is needed. To just say they can be without explanation would be incomplete and lacking. To fully comprehend the language of videogames the player must have an understanding of the ludic elements; “win-states”, gameplay and interactivity, as well as the narrative elements; plot, setting, characters. Total fluency amounts from a combined understanding.

After watching the developer commentary on Journey for the first time I was dismayed. The game’s designers, artists and programmers explained how each part of Journey was made. They were all quite proud of the work they had done. Yet I could not accept what was being told to me. I was Dorothy having just seen behind the current. Journey was not the magical, rapturous game that stood as the foremost example of games as art; it was a bunch of men and women behind a fancy screen using cloak and dagger misdirection to make Oz. It ruined part of the experience for me. Of course I always knew that games were made by development teams sometimes ranging into the hundreds of people, but that somehow floated away from my recollection at the time. Here were the people how made Journey explaining that the gameplay worked like this, this art was inspired by this, this level was designed for this reason. They broke the game apart into its individual ludic and narrative elements. I was crestfallen.

Eventually I regained sense of myself and of videogames. When I watched the commentary again I was amazed by the synergy thatgamecompany was able to create with Journey. The ludic and narrative elements of the game work in tandem to create an experience unlike any other offered in videogames. Of course Journey is just a bench mark example of ludonarrative resonance; not perfect, but damn near close. That is because Journey was designed from the beginning with emotion in mind to be the final end goal. The “win-states” in Journey consist of exploration and flight. Both are actions that are intimately tied to joyous feelings. The narrative is one of redemption and rebirth that again builds a strong emotional connection. Journey has very little ludonarrative dissonance because both the ludic and narrative components of the game were designed with the same goal in mind. 

Focused development on the core aspects of the experience is often the best way to avoid ludonarrative dissonance within a videogame. When the entire team is focused on one end goal the total project benefits. The ludic elements of the game must work with each other to further the experience the developer is attempting to make. “Win-states” need to have functioning input from the player to work. Simply put, if the player cannot interact with the game in a constructive way then the “win-states” serve no purpose. A similar manner must be applied to the narrative elements. Story needs to work with art direction and sound design to effectively build a narrative worth exploring through the game play. Finally the two must be merged in a way that benefits both of them. When reading a book, to continue to the next plot point in the story all the reader has to do is turn the page. The action is not very disturbing to the experience at all. However when playing a videogame to progress to the next plot point the player must engage in game world via the ludic elements the developer has designed for the player to use. When done incorrectly the ludic elements can be very disruptive to the narrative and the narrative can be disruptive to the ludic elements. 

When done properly the player should not be able to discern the difference between the gameplay and the narrative portions of the game. A combined understanding of both is necessary for the player to do this. Videogames are a language through which the developer engages with the player.  Just as the developer must put forth to create, the player must put forth to accept. A combined understanding of ludic and narrative elements will make the game experience better. Most ludic elements fostered through the language of videogames can be learned through observation, experimentation and response followed by applied assumptions. I say ‘most’ ludic elements because videogames are still evolving. The language of videogames is in a constant state of expansion and growth. Narratives on the other hand have been around much longer. That is not to say that they have no room to grow, just that they have already been long categorized and explained. Narrative elements such as plot, setting and characters are already well known and understood. The player can be considered fluent in the language of videogames when they have a combined understanding of both ludic and narrative elements of game.

Combined understanding fosters ludonarrative resonance in videogames. The developer must be fluent in the language of videogames to make, write, an experience that the player can then pick up on as someone playing, reading, the game. Engagement between the player and the developer is the basic unspoken pack that all videogames operate on. Both parties expect something from the other for the total experience to work as it was intended. And no matter how fluent either party, developer or player, is the game will ultimately be un-engaging if either one of them does not accept the agreement. Videogames are the developer’s artist and creative expression, the player is there to experience it. True combined understanding is the understanding between developer and player.

The Language of Videogames: Part 5 Narrative Significance and Ludonarrative Dissonance

We have already explored the symbolic and systematic basics that underline the functionality of the language of videogames. The way the game is designed is meant to guide the player on an experience of the developer’s choice. Interactive functionality with the game via “win-states” and other gameplay elements are all belonging to a larger group of ludic functionality. Ludic originating from the Latin word ludere which means ‘to play’.  Any word with the root ‘lud’ in reference to videogames and videogames study refers back to play or interactivity. Gameplay and “win-states” are types of ludic functionality that separate and individualize videogames from other media and from themselves. Genres of videogame classification are done by the games ludic functionality; shooter, platformer, puzzle. The language of videogames is ludic in design where each differing vernacular corresponds to a certain genre of game. Yet, where does the story and narrative of videogames fall? How integral a part of the experience are they if the language is designed to be ludic in function? 

As defined by the Oxford Online Dictionary narrative is “a spoken or written account of events; a story”. That definition is suitable, yet lacking. Narrative is also a framing device, the point of view through which a series of events is perceived. That is why within the world of storytelling it is called a narrator. Narrative as told through the language of videogames is no different. Videogames are another form of language through which a spoken or written account of events can be told. Videogames offer new opportunities to tell a story.

Narrative within a videogame gives impetus where “win-states” cannot. From purely gameplay or ludic perspective “win-states” are all that is necessary to make a game compelling. The prime example of this being Tetris. But once the ludic blinders have been removed the experience can fall short. Humans are creatures capable of immense perception. The sound of a subtle door creak, the smell of someplace worn and lived in, the faint brush of wind upon the back of your neck. These are the experiences that we as humans have come to recognize and associate as normal and interesting. Engagement in a purely ludic level quickly becomes tiresome. Narrative the second tool developers use to guide the player along the experience intended for them.

Form the pixilated cutscenes detailing love in Mrs. Pacman narrative has been an important part of the videogame experience. Few videogames go far without a story worth supporting. Bioshock, Mass Effect, The Last of Us are all games touted for their narrative as well as their gameplay. It is this seamless melding of ludic and narrative elements that creates the true beauty of the videogame art form. When interacting with a game the player wants not only to experience the feeling of fun brought froth via a “win-state”, they want to feel as though their actions have influence. Players do not merely wish to shoot at bad guys because it is fun; they wish to shoot at bud guys so they can save the world. It is no surprise that a majority of videogame stories are escapist, wish-fulfillment fantasies. Why would anyone simply read a book or watch a movie where their dream is fulfilled by someone else and they are left with the moderately bitter taste of vicarious enjoyment? Videogames offer unprecedented possibility. As technology increases the limits of what can be created slowly disappear. There is immeasurable potential in the merging ludic and narrative functionality to create something absolutely incredible.

As with all things of great potential there is also a treacherous downside to narrative in videogames that must be carefully navigated. Most commonly referred to as ludonarrative dissonance, it is the discrepancy between gameplay and narrative. When the ludic and narrative elements of a game do not meld the result lowers the entire experience. Recently Bioshock: Infinite has come under fire for the ludonarrative dissonance between its somber story and over the top shooter action. This is little surprise as the original Bioshock is the origin of the phrase. Clink Hocking coined it in describing how the story of Bioshock promotes selflessness by critiquing Objectivism while the gameplay encourages selfishness. The term has been applied to many games since its creation. The Uncharted series is commonly called dissonant for its portrayal of the main character. In cutscenes Nathan Drake is a charming rouge, in gameplay he is a merciless sociopath.   

 However, both Bioshocks are still considered exemplary videogames. The Uncharted series has received countless accolades throughout its time. There is a growing faction within videogame development, journalism and criticism that actively looks for ludonarrative dissonance. This group represents a growing sentiment that games deserve serious examination. The growing critical mindset is slowly becoming more prevalent, but it still remains under the majority of developers, journalists and critics that find no problem with dissonance. There has always been some dissonance in even the best of games and it has become accepted as standard. This is the story part of the game. This is the play part. For the longest time a seamless blending of the narrative and ludic elements was impossible or at best poorly done. That is why Bioshock and Uncharted are respected the way they are. Dissonance is not considered a problem. 

Ludonarrative dissonance is still a difficult concept for a large majority of the gaming populace to accept. The concept of intelligent, critical game analysis is still very new.  The transitionary stages of uncomfortable and awkward growth for videogame analysis mirror that of the game’s industry in the past. It is my best assumption that critical analysis will continue to follow the same path videogames as a total have. In the future there will no longer be critiques of games calling them out for ludonarrative dissonance, but instead ludonarrative resonance. 

The future of videogames lies in the complete and seamless melding of ludic and narrative elements. Some games have come close, others have purposely exploited dissonance to create a dramatic disconnect between player and player character, but there is still potential waiting to be achieved in ludonarrative resonance. I cannot wait.

The Language of Videogames: Part 4 The “Win-State”

Once a player has become fluent in the language of videogames there is one more step to increasing comprehension and understanding. Where other languages and artistic mediums stop at the point of creator/audience engagement, games take it one step further. Videogames are unique for the ability of the player to interact with their experience. The developer crafted it, yet it remains to the player to experience it; differing players with have differing experiences. A film or book is stagnant, it is as it will always be, the way the author or director intended it to be. There is nothing wrong with that, I love me some books, but they lack the interactivity that games have. It is that direct involvement with the game which sets videogames apart from other media. 

But what is the player involvement for? Why give away control of a finely crafted story or world to someone else? What makes games unique is also what makes them so risky from a narrative perceptive. A player could just as easily become absorbed in the story as they could by ignoring it all together, messing around with the environment and such. Developers combat this with what is called the “win-state”. Something that when achieved constitutes a “win” allowing for further progress. 

“Win-states” vary in size and grandeur according to what he game requires of it. Beating the game is a total “win-state” the player has completed the entire game. However, smaller “win-states” exist within the game. Jaime Griesemer, former game designer at Bungie on the Halo franchise and now of Sucker Punch, properly exemplifies a “win-state” in his most famous quote: “In Halo 1, there was maybe 30 seconds of fun that happened over and over and over again, so if you can get 30 seconds of fun, you can pretty much stretch that out to be an entire game. Encountering a bunch of guys, melee attacking one of them before they were aware, throwing a grenade into a group of other guys, and then cleaning up the stragglers before they could surround you. And so you can have all the great graphics, and all the different characters, and lots of different weapons with amazing effects, but if you don't nail that 30 seconds, you're not gonna have a great game.” The “Win-state” is that “30 seconds of fun”. The player’s rewarded for playing the game the way the developer intended. ‘Go here, shoot this, avoid this’. When the player does that, they have completed the requirement constituting in a “win-state”, the sense of enjoyment and fun. Play the game the way the developer intended for the player to play it and the player shall be rewarded with fun.

It is this feedback loop that makes games compelling. Involvement of the player to further the total “win-state”, completion of the game, is what most developers count on for impetus throughout their game. The player is never in any danger and more often than not the player character will have infinite revives to continue playing. Any sense of urgency or compulsion to the game is reliant on the “win-state” of the game. Players of online shooters chase the second to second high of a “win-state” achieved via completion, action, victory and defeat. Players of stealth games derive pleasure from the waiting, the stealthily hunting of enemies or the thrill of remaining undetected. These are the small “win-states” the amount to the moment to moment enjoyment of a game. Even horror games follow a “win-state” design. The only difference being that horror games use a sense of fear, isolation and suspense to generate an emotional response. Not all games seek to deliver fun in the same manner. Player enjoyment can be derived from a multitude of sources.

As a whole a videogame presents a challenge to the player. A larger “win-state” waits above the entire game for it to be completed. Recognizing these “win-states” becomes second nature to fluent game players. The language of videogames is one of conflict. Meant to engage and challenge the player. A goal is set, rules are laid out and tools are given, it then falls to the player to complete the game. Surprisingly the larger “win-state” of most games are not as complex as the story told around them tend to be. In the interview God of War: Game Directors Live, David Jaffe says the “win-state” of the original God of War simply to get Pandora’s Box. “A lot of times when we play videogames it may take you a day or a week or a month or longer to finish it … and so you tend to forget a lot of the details. And so it was important that the core through line was very simple… go get the box. Even if you spend six months away from God of War … that was a pretty simple thing to hang your brain on. Okay, I know what this is about.” (Full interview can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QEwdTVhTOE. The specific part mentioned is happens a 52:44 and on for the next few minutes.) As mentioned before the true beauty of a videogame comes from the nuances within the language. “Win-states” may be simple measures of enjoyment looped into a game; however without them all videogames would fall flat. Lacking any sense of motivation or drive would be an irredeemable flaw on the games part. There would be no reason to play it. 

Fluency in the language of videogames is beyond the requirements of fluency in another language. Engagement with the creator is just the beginning of comprehension through the language of videogames. Interactivity is a fundamental part of what makes a videogame a videogame and the language reflects that. Using simple to understand loops of challenge and reward a larger meaning can be built. The nuances of the language present themselves through the use of “win-states” compiling upon each other to create an immersive experience.  Videogames are constructs designed by people to tell stories, share thoughts and create experiences. The language of videogames is how those experiences are built and governed. When a player possesses a fluent understanding of the language, engagement with the developer can be forged along with engagement through the interactive mechanics of the game. “Win-states” are the developer’s way of guiding the player through the experience they have crafted. Without the use of “win-states” a videogame would be just another book or film.