View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Falmouth University Research Repository (FURR) Ludic Dysnarrativa: How Can Fictional Inconsistency In Games Be Reduced? by Rory Keir Summerley A Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) at the University of the Arts London In Collaboration with Falmouth University December 2017 Abstract The experience of fictional inconsistencies in games is surprisingly common. The goal was to determine if solutions exist for this problem and if there are inherent limitations to games as a medium that make storytelling uncommonly difficult. Termed ‘ludic dysnarrativa’, this phenomenon can cause a loss of immersion in the fictional world of a game and lead to greater difficulty in intuitively understanding a game’s rules. Through close textual analysis of The Stanley Parable and other games, common trends are identified that lead a player to experience dysnarrativa. Contemporary cognitive theory is examined alongside how other media deal with fictional inconsistency to develop a model of how information (fictional and otherwise) is structured in media generally. After determining that gaps in information are largely the cause of a player feeling dysnarrativa, it is proposed that a game must encourage imaginative acts from the player to prevent these gaps being perceived. Thus a property of games, termed ‘imaginability’, was determined desirable for fictionally consistent game worlds. Many specific case studies are cited to refine a list of principles that serve as guidelines for achieving imaginability. To further refine these models and principles, multiplayer games such as Dungeons and Dragons were analysed specifically for how multiple players navigate fictional inconsistencies within them. While they operate very differently to most single-player games in terms of their fiction, multiplayer games still provide useful clarifications and principles for reducing fictional inconsistencies in all games. Negotiation between agents (designers, players, game rules) in a game is of huge value to maintaining coherent fictional worlds and social information in some multiplayer games takes on a role close to that of fictional information in single player games. Dysnarrativa can also be used to positive effect in certain cases such as comedy games, horror games or for satirical purposes. DISCLAIMER – Online Version This version of the thesis is distributed so as not to be in breach of any copyright. This is mainly in regard to certain figures cited throughout the thesis. Every effort has been made to block out any images that the original publisher has not given permission to be republished here. The original images can be found via the cited information in the figure caption and in the bibliography. ii Table of Contents Acknowledgements p.iv Introduction p.1 Chapter 1 - Before the Narrative Contradiction Gets Any Worse: The Stanley Parable and Dysnarrativa p.7 Chapter 2 - The Gap Between: Fiction and Significance p.57 Chapter 3 - Bridging the Gap: The Quality of Being Imaginable Part 1 - Context p.95 Part 2 - Representational Balance p.130 Chapter 4 - For the Game’s Own Sake: Multiplayer Games and Dysnarrativa p.171 Conclusion p.207 Bibliography p.218 Glossary p.234 iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following for their contributions and support in the development of this research: Prof. Tanya Krzywinska and Dr. Douglas Brown for supervising me through a Masters Degree and this Doctoral Degree and for offering me grand opportunities. Dr. Sarah Arnold for supervising me part of the way through this Doctoral Degree. Prof. John Hall for his introductions to Doctoral Research. Jemma Julian for her unlimited patience and help with the administrative aspects of this research. Jerome Fletcher and Dr. Robert Gallagher for examining this research with thorough scrutiny. This research would not have been possible without the studentship awarded by Falmouth University to help fund this work. Thanks are also due for the following: All authors included in the bibliography. Game developers everywhere for their hard work without which this research would not exist. Specifically I would like to thank the following members of the games industry for sublime work that either stoked the flames of my interest in games or got me through the duration of this research: Alexey Pajitnov, Amy Hennig, Atsushi Inaba, Austin Jorgensen, Brian Allgeier, Brian Moriarty, Chad Moldenhauer, Chris Crawford, Chris Rothwell, Craig Filshie, Davey Wreden, David Doak, Daisuke Ishiwatari, Daisuke Sato, Dylan Jobe, Eiji Aonuma, Goichi Suda, Gunpei Yokoi, Hideki Kamiya, Hideo Kojima, Hidetaka Miyazaki, Hidetaka Suehiro, Hiroyuki Sakamoto, James Worrall, Jared Moldenhauer, Jervis Johnson, Jim Crawford, Jonathan Blow, Katsuhiro Harada, Kazuyoshi Osawa, Kim Swift, Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen, Koji Kondo, Marc Laidlaw, Mark Pacini, Mark Stephen Pierce, Mary DeMarle, Mathijs de Jonge, Masafumi Takada, Masahiro Sakurai, Michel Ancel, Neil Druckmann, Raph Koster, Rick Priestly, Rob Francis, Robin Walker, Satoru Iwata, Shigeru Miyamoto, Shinji Mikami, Takeshi Ozawa, Ted Price, Toby Fox, Tsubasa Sakaguchi, Walt Williams, Warren Spector, William Mills, William Pugh, Yoko Taro, Yusuke Amano and those that contributed to the formation of the game of Baseball. The Fighting Game Community for many memorable moments. Kyle Bosman for his insights on context. Bob Dylan, Elvis Presley and Frank Zappa for being very fine musicians. Prof. Frank Millward for generously fulfilling his end of the contract. The staff and students of the Falmouth University Game Development Course (2014-2018) for their help and for providing the opportunity to discuss games of all kinds. Friends who indulged me in long and fruitful discussions on games and other topics: Alun Meredith, Christy Salter, David Schofield, Declan Kolakowski, Jack Hackett, Luke Keane, Marcus Desai, Robert Siduice, Dr. Theo Keane, Dr. Tiffany Kataria. The cats, Mario and Luigi. Lastly I want to thank my mother, father, sister and family without whom I certainly would not have accomplished this research. Thank you for patiently supporting me through this research and for providing invaluable guidance through all aspects of my life. iv Introduction: Druckmann’s Dismissal of Dysnarrativa It is worth a quick word on why fictional inconsistencies in games should be reduced. Ever since games have introduced a fictional setting for players to imagine there have been problems with fictional inconsistency. This fictional inconsistency is not something I believe should (or even can) always be eliminated but it is curiously ubiquitous in games and its prevalence causes me to wonder why glaringly obvious inconsistencies are not resolved more often. I hypothesise that this is due to a limited understanding of how best to mesh fiction with the medium-specific qualities of a game and is thus the focus of my research. One of the most commonly discussed examples of what this thesis will go on to call dysnarrativa is that of Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune (Naughty Dog, 2007) protagonist Nathan Drake appearing an otherwise likeable everyman until, ludically, he is required to kill hundreds of mercenaries throughout the course of the game (Peckham, 2016). This is considered, by many (Juster, 2009; Parkin, 2015; Suellentrop, 2016; Peckham, 2016), to present a tone at odds with the character’s portrayal (remarkably free of remorse or stress-related trauma). In an interview, Uncharted series designer Neil Druckmann discusses the idea of ludonarrative dissonance in the series coming to the following conclusion: Because we don't buy into it. I've been trying to dissect it. Why is it that Uncharted triggers this argument, when Indiana Jones doesn't? Is it the number? It can't be just the number, because Indiana Jones kills more people than a normal person does. A normal person kills zero people. And Indiana Jones kills a dozen, at least, over the course of several movies. What about Star Wars? Han Solo and Luke Skywalker, are they some sort of serial killers? They laugh off having killed some stormtroopers. And in The Force Awakens, we see that a stormtrooper can actually repent for the person he is and come around, and there are actually real people under those helmets. It's a stylized reality where the conflicts are lighter, where death doesn't have the same weight. We're not trying to make a statement about Third World mercenaries, or the toll of having killed hundreds of people in your life. (Suellentrop, 2016) Druckmann has worked on numerous award-winning titles and the developer he works for, Naughty Dog, is at the forefront of narrative design for games. His credentials are hard to better within his field and yet Druckmann is dismissive of identifying it as fictionally inconsistent. Yet, I don’t think it is a foolish criticism to ask why Nathan Drake kills so many people. In the movies that Druckmann cites, the main character either kills less than 20 people in self-defense (as is the case with Indiana Jones) or they also kill a disturbingly large amount of people (when Luke Skywalker destroys the Death Star it can be assumed that he kills more than a few 1 hundred people) but for a previously explained greater good (i.e. galactic peace). To be clear killing even one person can be disturbing but, as Druckmann points out, death ‘doesn’t have the same weight’ in fiction. However, Druckmann also asks if it is ‘the number’ which I think is part of the point of contention for many. The number of people Nathan Drake kills isn’t important just because the number indicates Drake’s strange morality (quipping one minute, while gunning down 20 men the next). There are other problematic things it brings to the forefront of our mind. In a regular playthrough of Uncharted 4 (Naughty Dog, 2016) the player will (without much difficulty) end up killing at least 500 men.