https://wiki.hard-light.net/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=81.182.81.212&feedformat=atomFreeSpace Wiki - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T07:26:51ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.31.7https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_Chatter&diff=111Mission Chatter2005-06-07T17:26:39Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Mission Chatter==<br />
<br />
Mission chatter, or Pilot chatter, is essential to the feel of a good mission. It gives a mission a sense of reality that even some [V] missions lacked, and immerses the player more completely in the action. Pilot chatter can be used to fill in space between dogfights, give the player subtle hints about the universe the mission/campaign designer has decided on, recall information from earlier in a campaign so that its fresh in the players mind for later reference, and plenty more. It's a hugely important plot and mood element for any mission, and yet is one of the most neglected. So, without further ado, here are some basic guidelines for producing decent pilot chatter in your mission.<br />
<br />
=Step 1 - Build the Mission=<br />
<br />
It's generally not a good idea to do your chatter during the formative stages of a mission’s development. You often don't have a full grasp on where you want to see the mission go, and even rarer is to know how you want it to get there. Pilot chatter has to be relevant to the events of the mission and campaign, otherwise it sounds disjointed and artificial. Also, before the mission is completed, it's unlikely you'll be able to determine the best time to put the chatter in. Placing it over the top of a dogfight would be silly, and chances are it wouldn't get read anyway. So, before you start your pilot chatter, it's a good idea to have at least a reasonably complete mission, so that you can be sure the timing is good, and the content relevant<br />
<br />
NB - As with any rule, there are exceptions. If your mission begins several minutes before the action so you could fill this space with pilot chatter, of course this can be done before the mission is complete. This will undoubtedly be essential to set the scene of the mission, and quite possibly relevant to later events. Besides - if you mission is set two or three minutes before the start of any action, you're going to need _something_ to occupy your time during testing.<br />
<br />
=Step 2 - Define your content=<br />
<br />
This is a quick, but essential step towards good pilot chatter. As mentioned above, pilot chatter can perform multiple roles in a mission, and is more than just a space-filler. Here you need to define what it is that you want mentioned. Is there an event from a previous mission the player should be recalling? Is there another operation going on at the same time as the players mission that may become relevant later? If you're guarding a convoy, does the player need to know what's aboard the freighters? It's much easier to know what you want said at this point in the process, as it gives you definable goals towards which you can work, and makes deciding on what specifically to say much easier.<br />
<br />
=Step 3 – Script your Messages=<br />
<br />
So, by now, you've built a mission, and you've decided what's going to be spoken about. Now all you have to do is create the specific messages. This is the most important part of the pilot chatter process, as the specific messages are the things that the player will be seeing, and without them, you obviously have no chatter. So clearly, you'll need to take a lot of care to ensure that this part is done right. Though that might sound daunting and time consuming, it really is only as hard as you make it. First, play through the mission two or three times. Find out where the quiet parts are, how many wingmen you typically lose along the way, choose the events you want to comment on, etc. (NB - if you do this during testing, you can save yourself some time). Along with the content you defined earlier, this will form the framework for the messages. Now you're more than ready to begin your scripting.<br />
<br />
=Tips=<br />
<br />
*To make your messages sound more natural and unified without voice acting, try to insert a sense of character into your wingmen. Is Alpha 2 a cocky hotshot? A battered, jaded old veteran? A green, over enthusiastic Ensign straight out of the academy?<br />
<br />
*Say your messages out loud once you've written them down. The spoken word and the written word are not the same thing. If it sounds unnatural coming out of your mouth, it's probably not quite right, and needs changing. If English isn’t your first language, you may consider asking a native English speaking friend or beta tester to perform these tests/changes for you.<br />
<br />
*Watch out for spelling errors. Nothing looks more unprofessional than a poorly spelled message or briefing, except possibly a poorly spelled mission objective or ship name. Check all of your spelling twice, with a word processors spell checker if available.<br />
<br />
*If you're building a single mission rather than a campaign, pilot chatter can sometimes be harder to think up. Some possibilities are<br />
<br />
- Pilots responding to Commands orders, or relaying them more specifically to the rest of the wing.<br />
<br />
- Pilots discussing current events, or life aboard whatever ship they’re stationed on<br />
<br />
- Pilots communicating with vessels they’ve been assigned to escort, perhaps asking about cargo, or their destination.<br />
<br />
- Pilots discussing the nature of the enemy, or their previous experiences with this enemy (This is great for introducing new enemies to the player as well)<br />
<br />
- Pilots commenting on newly arrived ships in place or in addition to command. This can be mentioning their intentions, or their class, or even their affiliation to flesh out Commands famous “Incoming Jump Signature! Hostile Configuration!<br />
<br />
*If, on the other hand, you’re working on a campaign mission, remember to refer back to previous missions in that campaign. Not only does this enhance the sense of continuity missing from many fan campaigns, but it can also provide an easily accessible basis for a lot of pilot chatter in your mission, making the process of thinking it up that much simpler. If the missions directly previous to yours are being done by somebody else, remember to stay in close contact, and see if they’ll give you a beta or even some sort of mission outline or script. If these missions aren’t done yet, or are being done by another staff member whom you can’t contact, you’ll have to try and improvise, and hope they follow the outline given to them. Alternately, remember you can always come back and edit details in or out of your chatter script.<br />
<br />
*Use send-message-list sexps. They’re easy to understand if you follow the rules down the bottom, keep down your sexp number, and they’re very convenient for long lists of messages, such as pilot conversations. Keep in mind though, that SML sexps fire as true from the start of the first message, not the end of the last, so if you want to base an event on the completion of one of these sexps, you’ll need to know precisely how long the conversation lasts (easy to do by adding up the relevant time entries, which are in milliseconds, not seconds (1 sec = 1000 ms))<br />
<br />
*Consider your chatter carefully. Your pilots should not toss off casual jokes when attacking a massive Shivan ship and holding the fate of humanity in their hands. Such jokes are also less funny when in orbit of a completely destroyed colony, or after the failure of your mission objectives that may have resulted in thousands of deaths. Pilot chatter is essential, however, in missions like convoy escorts, or quiet capship guards. Use common sense in defining your messages, and there shouldn’t be any problems.<br />
<br />
Right. If you read all that, then you should have no trouble in making interesting, chatter filled missions from this point on. Keep in mind though, it’s only a guide. Other ways may turn out to be more efficient for your style of FREDding, or you might decide that what I’m saying is total rubbish, and you simply have a better way. (If so, chuck it up. Wikis are cool like that). And there are also missions where common rules and guidelines have to be suspended for realism or continuity or whatever. However, for most missions, the basic ideas presented here will adapt well, and hopefully there’ll never be an excuse to FRED a quiet mission again.<br />
<br />
=Common problems=<br />
<br />
_How can I make the head anis on my messages match up with the head anis on the messages FS2 Sends?_<br />
<br />
The heads (and voices, and the messages themselves for that matter) that your wingmen send are defined by their persona. You can set the persona of various ships in the ship edit box. Then, all you need to do is to make sure you send your messages with the head ani used by that ships persona.<br />
<br />
<b>Wingman 1 is Head-TP1</b><br />
<br />
<b>Wingman 2 is Head-TP5</b><br />
<br />
<b>Wingman 3 is Head-TP6</b><br />
<br />
<b>Wingman 4 is Head-TP7</b><br />
<br />
<b>Wingman 5 is Head-TP8</b><br />
<br />
<b>Wingman 6 is Head-VP1</b><br />
<br />
<b>Wingman 7 is Head-VP2</b><br />
<br />
_Whenever my wingmen die, Command sends the messages I wanted them to send, making my conversations make no sense. What can I do?_<br />
<br />
This is undoubtedly the biggest and most common problem with sending any kind of message in FS2, and it’s even more common with pilot chatter, since other pilots die so easily. There are ways around it, but it does require extra sexping. One of the more common ways is to make the pilots whom you want to send the messages survive is to use the ship-invulnerable sexp to make them invincible below a certain hull percentage. Keep in mind though, the longer they remain invulnerable, the more unbalanced the mission will get. It’s a good idea to change them back after they’ve sent their messages.<br />
<br />
If you find this unbalances things too much, you can try back up messages. This involves much more sexping, but it does work. Say you want Alpha 2 to send a message thirty seconds after the mission has started. Create your message sexp referencing Alpha 2 and tell it to fire when time elapsed has reached thirty. Then, create another sexp that references Alpha 3, and only fire if time elapsed has reached 30 seconds _and_ Alpha 2 is dead _and_ Alpha 3 is not dead. Alpha 4 will send the message after thirty seconds when both Alpha's 2 and 3 are dead, and Alpha 4 is not. It's important to ensure the new wingman is alive, and all previous wingmen are dead, or you'll get multiple copies of messages being sent.<br />
<br />
This process can be repeated as many times as there are friendly fighters in the mission, or as many times as you feel is necessary. Keep in mind, if you’re worried about maintaining Head Ani continuity, you’ll need several messages, each with a different Ani (I will generally only put two in, reasoning that, in theory at least, there’s a better than average chance that one of the first two will be alive, and after that, the message being sent is more important than head ani continuity being maintained.<br />
<br />
Other ways around this problem are to use intense pilot chatter early in the mission (When pilots are more likely to be alive) and fill the latter half with chatter between capships, newly arrived pilots, or command. Also, keep in mind that messages that don’t have to be sent can be given a priority of Normal or Low – this will mean that they will not be sent at all if the ship charged with sending them dies. This is not, however, a viable option for conversations, or story important messages.<br />
<br />
If there are any other questions, please feel free to post on the forum. Someone will no doubt answer, and hopefully add your question to the Wiki. Good Luck!</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_design&diff=38Mission design2005-06-07T17:24:49Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div><br>[[FRED Tips]]<br />
<br>[[References]]<br />
<br>[[Backgrounds]]<br />
<br>[[Plot Development]]<br />
<br>[[Mission Chatter]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Plot_Development_(Part_Seven)&diff=4147Plot Development (Part Seven)2005-06-07T17:24:01Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>INDUCING REALITY<br />
The Holy Grail of Storytelling<br />
<br />
by Ken "frobber" Ramsley<br />
<br />
Part 7<br />
<br />
CAN A GREAT STORY BE TOLD IN A GAME?<br />
<br />
The important thing is never to stop questioning.<br />
<br />
Albert Einstein<br />
<br />
<br />
=YES AND NO=<br />
<br />
This will be the last chapter in this series. I had thought about writing more after this, but the short answer to my big question is both yes and no -- so much so that I don't want to dance around it for more than one chapter. Here I will give you my thoughts, then turn it over to a thread I started a few months ago which makes a lot of points better than I can here.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=IN THE BEGINNING=<br />
<br />
There was a time when games did not tell us stories... or at least not in the way that I have been talking about in this series. Of course there are certain story elements in Pac Man and even Pong. As players of those games, we tried to stay alive and build up points. We identified the adversary -- the ghosts, or the other Pong player, or even the bouncy wall in Pong single-player mode -- but these early games were more about prolonging the experience -- staying alive, or piling up points. And that is not much like a complete story at all.<br />
<br />
Simulating real life has gotten us a little closer. SimCity allows us to build a place and see how it might work. SimCopter lets us play out emergencies there. And "The Sims" lets us show up and interact with other real people inside this imagined place. But simulated realism in and of itself is not a story -- only potentially a setting for a story -- because it does not exist to prove a premise or fight for a goal. In fact the whole point of The Sims is even less than that of Pac Man -- to hang around, but not do anything unless you want.<br />
<br />
Games like Quake and Unreal have goals, but the "characters" are are a bunch of morons with guns and otherwise no life. Why are we here? Why do we have to fight? Indeed there are antagonists -- people-like 3D graphical "AI" that shoot back at us, and sometimes a big bad guy "boss" who rarely has a reason for being so big and so bad. And that's about it.<br />
<br />
Zelda and the worlds of Final Fantasy are magical places. But the conflict is stilted and D&D-like. Jet Force Gemini is a challenge of will against a maze-like opposition. Mario is a fun-loving puppet. And in this way we've had more and better games come our way no doubt. But I did not have much hope for storytelling in games until I started playing Thief.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=WHERE WE STAND TODAY=<br />
<br />
System Shock, Deus Ex, and Thief are probably the closest we have right now to games which are built to be told as much as played. The main characters in these three games all have a problem that they want to solve, and there is something personal about it. The settings are no longer just contrived backdrops for the action. The places themselves speak about the nature of the world they face -- whether it's confined to a creaking space ship, a crumbling set of futuristic cities, or a pseudo-medieval world of magic. And the main characters here are more normal in their abilities. But even these games do not tell us a great story, because the point of all stories in games to date has been to improve the gameplay.<br />
<br />
As long as the main point of games is gameplay we will continue to face formidable barriers to storytelling as a principal element of the experience. A story has a fairly fixed structure and path to be followed, whereas a game tends to be open-ended with multiple pathways. When a game gets structured as a story it can feel excessively linear with too few options for the player -- but opened up for gameplay the game can lose its cohesive storyline. Games can be played any way the player chooses, and this means that each player has a unique experience which may be nothing like what was planned by the level mapper. How can I be sure to have a player follow the storyline without over-constraining gameplay? It isn't easy, and the balance has not yet been fully struck in any game that I have played.<br />
<br />
But this is not to say that it can't be done or hasn't been done to some lesser extent. Perhaps if we think about this more, and work out some guidelines, then maybe we can do it better and more often.<br />
<br />
Here are some ways that games might still play out like games, but do a better job at telling us a story...<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=SUGGESTIONS FOR HOW TO IMPROVE STORY TELLING IN GAMES=<br />
<br />
1. Instead of telling one linear story, build several multi-threaded storylines that interact. As the player moves through the game, some story will be told no matter what. As the player interacts with more of these threads the overall experience of the story will be deepened.<br />
<br />
2. Realize how a game is still a game, and that it still has to be a game even after a story has been built into it. Just as games have gotten better when we added story elements, I believe that an intensely story-oriented experience will still need to retain strong gaming elements in order to work interactively.<br />
<br />
3. Give names to everyone in the place and create a backstory for them. These people (and even the aliens) may not ever get to tell their own stories in detail, but as a mapper, you may begin to see them as three-dimensional characters and as a result have them behave accordingly when they do show up.<br />
<br />
4. Give everyone in the story a good reason for being there. Maybe in the past it was easier that characters were just slaves or soldiers without a choice, but it might be better if they could somehow be in it for themselves, like pirates hoping for their share of the booty.<br />
<br />
5. Create obstacles that are consistent with the characters. No more exploding squirrels. No more senseless lava pits. Have the antagonists resist and fight based on who they are and what they think. Avoid building silly traps and other random events intended merely to slow the player down.<br />
<br />
6. Give the role-playing main character a rounded life with a richly understood background. Let him have a girlfriend, a flat, money problems, and a family history. Don't just pluck him off the street or from some asteroid mining colony with no memory of who he is or how he got here.<br />
<br />
7. Make everything that can happen tie into the story. Perhaps the ship is falling apart because the antagonist is a cheap bastard -- not because the level maker just thought it would be cool. Reeeeaaallly cool elements fit in and are not just plopped at our feet.<br />
<br />
8. Let the player find out about his role-playing character as the game progresses, and have the character grow through these discoveries. Don't just automatically "level-up" the character after completing each level.<br />
<br />
9. Let the main character take a fall that creates a permanent disability -- Medical help and potions are absurd unless there are at least a few things that can't be cured.<br />
<br />
10. AI must become much more intelligent. I know this is the hardest part in building games. But nothing about the story can hold much water if the player is the only one in the game making reasonable decisions (perhaps multiplayer games solve this -- or perhaps make matters worse.). AI should be able to interact, not just react. Otherwise they are merely pop-up opposition.<br />
<br />
11. Just as in a movie or a book, the game player should understand the premise early, learn about the main characters in the first act, see increasing conflict and some initial evidence for the premise in the second act, and confront the climactic conclusion and prove the premise only in the end -- just like a real story.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
With this I conclude my series, although I do not end the quest to answer my question. So perhaps I will say that when the day comes that a great story is finally told inside a gaming type interactive environment, we will all know that it has happened.<br />
<br />
Cheers!<br />
<br />
A LOG FROM THE EIDOS THIEF FORUM<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
Junior Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 10<br />
<br />
From:Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
Registered: Nov 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 11:03 AM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
Can a great story be told in a game?<br />
<br />
That is the question I'm asking myself right now. But I am not sure if this is possible -- or even the main point of gaming right now.<br />
<br />
I do see how people are hard wired to experience stories -- and I also see how the story elements of a game are (or can be) very important to the gaming experience for continuity. But I have yet to find a "game" which primarily exists to tell a story -- some are getting closer to this, though (especially Thief).<br />
<br />
So to ask my question more precisely...<br />
<br />
Can a great story be told as the primary objective of the "gaming" experience, rather than just as a mere sub-text to give the experience some continuity?<br />
<br />
I'd like to hear what you have to say because now is the time for this discussion... considering how technology is placing enough tools in our hands to go beyond traditional gaming.<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Peter Smith<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 525<br />
<br />
From:San Diego, CA and Los Alamos, NM<br />
<br />
Registered: Feb 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 11:17 AM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
Hi, frobber.<br />
<br />
I think a great story is highly desirable, but I think that there must be other elements in order to call it a game. Otherwise, it is an interactive book, which is a new art form being explored on the net. I think adding the 3-D and adventure elements would make the book even more interesting. It is definitely an idea worth pursuing.<br />
<br />
The mission Trail of Blood comes to mind as a possible model. There is a little more story and a little less game to that one, but the element of finding your way through a maze, solving a puzzle, and avoiding AI are still there, so it is still a game. Add a little more story, and you might have it. The better the story, the less you might need in the way of other elements.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
sycodrew_3000<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 40<br />
<br />
From:Wyoming MI<br />
<br />
Registered: May 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 11:33 AM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
Yes, great stories can be told like that, but only in a great game.<br />
<br />
Story is the biggest thing I look for in a game. But most games these days only need good graphics to be popular, since 60% of gamers are shallow in that way.That's why thief is my favorite game; it has eye candy and gameplay plus a grade A story.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
Junior Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 10<br />
<br />
From:Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
Registered: Nov 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 11:47 AM<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Originally posted by Peter Smith:<br />
<br />
I think a great story is highly desirable, but I think that there must be other elements in order to call it a game. Otherwise, it is an interactive book, which is a new art form being explored on the net. I think adding the 3-D and adventure elements would make the book even more interesting. It is definitely an idea worth pursuing.<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Agreed. A "game" is like a story and often includes story elements, but it is a different beast than being mainly a story in itself.<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Originally posted by Peter Smith:<br />
<br />
The mission Trail of Blood comes to mind as a possible model. There is a little more story and a little less game to that one, but the element of finding your way through a maze, solving a puzzle, and avoiding AI are still there, so it is still a game. Add a little more story, and you might have it. The better the story, the less you might need in the way of other elements.<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
TOB feels more like a story because of its inherent linearity -- traditional stories are linear like this. We want to know what is at the end and have very little idea of what this might be -- unlike most Thief missions where we usually have at least some idea of where we're going and why.<br />
<br />
I wonder where the boundary is between primarily "story" and primarily "game." And at this point I am inclined to think that it is more of a continuum than any fixed wall. I also get a sense that both "game" and "story" may soon be subsets of something bigger (or at least newer) -- like how the first movies started out looking like filmed stage plays before the medium found its own feet.<br />
<br />
Thanks for writing.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
ndru<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 175<br />
<br />
From:ann arbor,mi,usa<br />
<br />
Registered: Dec 1999<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 11:47 AM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
IMHO a great story can be told within a game. It's really a matter of implementation. Most games at the moment seem to tack the story on, but the story should really come first above all else. That doesn't mean gameplay needs to be sacrificed, it just needs to be built around the story. A good example is Thief-TDP/Gold which has a very cohesive storyline, and leaves little unresolved. Unfortunately Thief2 went the other way, adding the story onto the missions and in my opinion, left a lot unresolved and many parts didn't make much sense.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
Junior Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 10<br />
<br />
From:Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
Registered: Nov 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 12:05 PM<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Originally posted by ndru:<br />
<br />
IMHO a great story can be told within a game. It's really a matter of implementation. Most games at the moment seem to tack the story on, but the story should really come first above all else. That doesn't mean gameplay needs to be sacrificed, it just needs to be built around the story. A good example is Thief-TDP/Gold which has a very cohesive storyline, and leaves little unresolved. Unfortunately Thief2 went the other way, adding the story onto the missions and in my opinion, left a lot unresolved and many parts didn't make much sense.<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Yes. This sounds right. As games have gotten bigger, story elements were added to bring about continuity. 50 levels of Donkey Kong was just about the limit of the no-story approach.<br />
<br />
Developers of Thief (and some other games to be fair) realized at some point that story elements not only helped hold the thing together, but also made for a more overall satisfying experience -- so in this sense, rather than painting on the story after the house is built, it's function has grown to where the story acts like a foundation.<br />
<br />
But the experience is still mainly gaming.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
ndru<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 175<br />
<br />
From:ann arbor,mi,usa<br />
<br />
Registered: Dec 1999<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 01:18 PM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
Also, stories in gaming are just beginning to be implemented (there are exceptions of course). Technology has pretty much kept gaming going for a while now, but I think most gamers are realizing that tech alone isn't cutting it anymore. I think to progress, game design needs the work of writers, as well as coders, designers and artists. As I understand it, game plots are currently created by people with other primary skills.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
Junior Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 10<br />
<br />
From:Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
Registered: Nov 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 01:43 PM<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Originally posted by ndru:<br />
<br />
Also, stories in gaming are just beginning to be implemented (there are exceptions of course). Technology has pretty much kept gaming going for a while now, but I think most gamers are realizing that tech alone isn't cutting it anymore. I think to progress, game design needs the work of writers, as well as coders, designers and artists. As I understand it, game plots are currently created by people with other primary skills.<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Does this mean that "games" can not get much better until story writing becomes more central to the design process?<br />
<br />
Clearly, if telling a story gets to be much more central, then adding full-time writers to the team (as you point out) makes a lot of sense.<br />
<br />
We are all good at something and weaker at others, and even if someone could write, program, level-edit, and do all of the artwork and audio -- nobody has the time to do it all. So specialized "gaming-writers" (for lack of a better term) would make sense.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
ndru<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 175<br />
<br />
From:ann arbor,mi,usa<br />
<br />
Registered: Dec 1999<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 02:52 PM<br />
<br />
Yes, that's something I think would really advance gaming. Movies have screenwriters, why can't games have gamewriters? Of course, close teamwork is necessary to bring all the aspects together. Regardless of their intentions, a level designer will put more effort into level design, the same for artists and musicians simply because it's their specialty. With writers working alongside however, the story will gain importance in the process.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
Junior Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 10<br />
<br />
From:Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
Registered: Nov 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 05:52 PM<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Originally posted by ndru:<br />
<br />
Yes, that's something I think would really advance gaming. Movies have screenwriters, why can't games have gamewriters? Of course, close teamwork is necessary to bring all the aspects together. Regardless of their intentions, a level designer will put more effort into level design, the same for artists and musicians simply because it's their specialty. With writers working alongside however, the story will gain importance in the process.<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
I like how you put this.<br />
<br />
The next thing to wonder, then, is how can this idea of a full-time writer work?<br />
<br />
These days the developers usually create some high-concept scenario, break the project down into levels or missions, then hand off these assignments to a bunch of sleep-starved level-editing designers who build the "game" --while programmers repair and expand the engine, and other folks keep adding library items like AI, cut scenes, and texture maps.<br />
<br />
Team meetings happen once in a while no doubt where the producer tries to get everybody back in sync -- especially after something can't be built on time. But I sense that for the most part there is no script per se like for a movie -- just a loose vision and storyline that evolves within the boundaries of the what is possible as time runs out and the deadline looms.<br />
<br />
Of course, movie-making is hardly any orchestrated thing of beauty either. But I do know that the better films happen when at least one person --the writer and especially the director-- establish the big picture from the start and keep it queued up all the time during development.<br />
<br />
Given how writers have been doing this big-picture role for several thousand years -- perhaps it does make sense (as you say) to put them in charge of creating the story in a separate (and lead) role -- rather than part-time while doing almost everything else.<br />
<br />
Now this brings me back to my main question...<br />
<br />
Even if we could begin to see full-time writers working on gaming projects, is it actually possible to tell a great story within an interactive role-playing format? Or does the non-linear nature of gaming itself prevent this medium from ever outgrowing its roots to tell a great story?<br />
<br />
I believe that it can be possible -- but I don't quite see how at this point... (if I had the answer, I wouldn't have started this thread )<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
ndru<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 175<br />
<br />
From:ann arbor,mi,usa<br />
<br />
Registered: Dec 1999<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 07:27 PM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
The multiple level nature of games is the key, I believe. The story itself will generally need to be linear and the core elements must be delivered within the game levels. The levels themselves don't need to be linear, they could contain multiple paths or methods to the same end. As long as the primary goal of the levels is to tell the story. The trick is tying the story elements to the level objectives. Each level is essentially a chapter of the story. Also the levels progression in difficulty can be a strong tool in building tension for the climax of the story.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Time Pilot<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 257<br />
<br />
From:Austin, TX<br />
<br />
Registered: Mar 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 07:45 PM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
Interesting topic!<br />
<br />
Actually, full-time writers are already being used in game development, at least for some games. Warren Spector had three full-time writers for Deus Ex. One of them, Sheldon Pacotti, has a web page, www.sheldonpacotti.com. To get an idea of how much writing was involved, take a look at the script. I'd like to see more of them in games; it can only be a good thing.<br />
<br />
As far as telling great stories as the primary objective of a game, that's being done today also. If you don't know, one of my favorite genres is interactive fiction (text adventures). There is a thriving internet culture of IF authors; people who create new works of IF. One of the new trends in these games is puzzleless IF. In these games, there are no puzzles or obstacles to hinder the player; the story is all. The best game of this type (in my opinion), is Photopia. I highly recommend you check it out. Admittedly, these are written by one person as a hobby, and don't have the graphics or length of commercial games.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
Junior Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 10<br />
<br />
From:Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
Registered: Nov 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-05-2000 10:13 PM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
Glad to hear that somebody is writing scripts for games! I actually bought Deus Ex a couple of months back before I got so busy in my work -- but it's next on my list.<br />
<br />
Regarding chapters and gaming levels...<br />
<br />
Sounds like as long as the basic story structure can be preserved in some way, then it doesn't matter what the media is. But many games are so terribly non-linear and jammed full of side-quests, puzzles, and traps --Zelda and Final Fantasy VIII come to mind-- that there's no way they can possibly follow any sort of predetermined intensity curve (which has to be there in some degree if the thing is going to be experienced as a story at all).<br />
<br />
As an experiment, my one and only Thief FM specifically dispenses with all of the side-quests and puzzles, and instead seeks to find out if all of this is really needed. Some people seem to like how it keeps rolling along. Others miss the puzzles and traps. So I think it will be a while before most players will buy into an interactive immersion-type gaming experience without at least some of the old gaming cliches.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Buglesoft<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 840<br />
<br />
From:Broomfield, CO<br />
<br />
Registered: Apr 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-06-2000 06:54 AM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
I must be a contrarian. I don't think a great story can be told in a great game. I hope I am wrong. I have seen some games come through that I consider "great", like Thief, but have yet to find a really good story in any game.<br />
<br />
I am not saying that some games have a very solid story line, and keep the player guessing about what comes next. I haven't seen the stories get beyond that. I would love to see the combination, but will gladly settle for great games with solid stories (Thief, Deus Ex, et al).<br />
<br />
I think this is a good topic and enjoy reading others thoughts.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
Junior Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 10<br />
<br />
From:Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
Registered: Nov 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-06-2000 08:32 AM<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Originally posted by Buglesoft:<br />
<br />
I must be a contrarian. I don't think a great story can be told in a great game. I hope I am wrong. I have seen some games come through that I consider "great", like Thief, but have yet to find a really good story in any game.<br />
<br />
I am not saying that some games have a very solid story line, and keep the player guessing about what comes next. I haven't seen the stories get beyond that. I would love to see the combination, but will gladly settle for great games with solid stories (Thief, Deus Ex, et al).<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
At this point I tend to agree with you. In fact, as I think about this, there really are two parts to my question...<br />
<br />
Is story telling possible as the primary aspect of gaming-like interactive medium? -- and if so what needs to be done to make this happen?<br />
<br />
Indeed (as you point out), great games are being built these days because they are bringing story telling elements into the fray -- but they are still games and nobody is calling them "stories" yet.<br />
<br />
Perhaps "The Sims" is what I am talking about -- but something much stronger, with a dramatic thread and goal. I think we'll recognize it when we finally see it.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
ivwildbil<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 361<br />
<br />
From:Redwood City, CA<br />
<br />
Registered: Aug 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-06-2000 02:20 PM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
I agree that there no GREAT stories being told by games. But can you really expect a GREAT story from a game. I mean what are we talking about here. The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, Homer, War and Peace? I think the Thief story is good, it could be improved, but it is pretty good for a video game.<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
And Remember Life is Short so Play Hard<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
Junior Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 10<br />
<br />
From:Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
Registered: Nov 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-06-2000 05:06 PM<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Originally posted by ivwildbil:<br />
<br />
I agree that there no GREAT stories being told by games. But can you really expect a GREAT story from a game. I mean what are we talking about here. The Hobbit, The Lord of the Ring, Homer, War and Peace? I think the Thief story is good, it could be improved, but it is pretty good for a video game.<br />
<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
Yes, your point is well-taken. Asking games to be the vehicle for an outstanding story telling experience may be asking way too much. I know how hard I tried to do this in my own Thief FM, and how it was nearly impossible to ensure that anyone would experience it as anything other than a backdrop. So perhaps games are not the way to go if story telling is the main objective -- certainly not "games" as we have them now at least.<br />
<br />
But trying to tell a great story using game-like immersion has its appeal -- given how some of the most dramatic moments I've ever felt in a fictional setting have happened in games. But it sounds like what I am after will require a new art form.<br />
<br />
And this leads to another question -- will the present-day way of gaming die out ...like Pong and Pac Man... to be replaced by something able to tell great stories? or will the present day model diverge into various separate-yet-well-accepted art forms ...games staying games ...and new types of story telling media arising which borrow heavily from games at first until this new media finds its own legs -- like how movies originally borrowed from the theater?<br />
<br />
One thing I do know about artists -- they will use whatever media they can get their hands on. So as soon as it becomes possible to tell a great story in a game-like immersive way, it will begin to happen.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Munin the Raven<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 1727<br />
<br />
From:Connecticut, United States<br />
<br />
Registered: Oct 1999<br />
<br />
posted 11-06-2000 07:07 PM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
Frobber, I also think it's important to bring up the relationship between games and their stories. The future of gaming really does depend on how this is developed.<br />
<br />
Interestingly enough, from what I understand, the three chapters of Thief were written before the game was developed (but while the engine was being toyed with and after the initial project idea). Later, the whole concept of being a thief was introduced (the story was originally called "Dark Camelot", then "The Dark Project", and Finally "Thief: The Dark Project"). As Thief II was being developed, however, the designers came up with good mission ideas and then "twisted" them into the story. Compare the two games with this in mind and its glaringly obvious that the first title was much more story-bond (and gripping, in my opinion).<br />
<br />
Is it really the story that we're talking about? Or is it the setting/atmosphere? Thief is outstanding because it creates its own fictional world of factions, technology, and magic; anyone could play Thief as their first video game without any previous knowledge of games and feel as if their mind projected it like a book. And this has nothing to do with the actual plot; it's the details, such background sounds, the title screen, the cut scenes and introduction, and the humorous side notes that make the player feel as though they're there. I call this the "immersion factor".<br />
<br />
Thief has one of the very best game stories out there. It's linear as a book is, but it lives because of the detail and atmosphere it's presented in.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
clayman<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 2546<br />
<br />
From:Knoxville, TN<br />
<br />
Registered: Jun 1999<br />
<br />
posted 11-06-2000 09:15 PM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
frobber -<br />
<br />
I have caught up with this topic, reading all the posts this evening. Very thought provoking, and a welcome addition to the discussion mix here on the forum.<br />
<br />
I have yet to find a game that has a compelling story. I am an avid and voluminous reader and collector of fiction first editions. I know a good story when I read it. But when I see/hear/experience it via PC ? I am unsure.<br />
<br />
I approach a PC game totally different from how I approach a book. For some reason(age/generational maybe) I approach a book with the goal that a great one will immerse me in story and ideas, with a PC game my goal is immersion in activity and deed.<br />
<br />
A book happens to me, and a great one rolls over me like a tidal wave. A game is something I control, conquer....and achieve some fantasy-level of "I am King"...for that moment anyway.<br />
<br />
I doubt seriously that a game will ever bind me to a story like a good book will. But that just may be the curmudgeon in me talking.<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
Clayman<br />
<br />
"It's a hell of a thing, killin' a man. You take away all he's got, and all he's ever gonna have." - William Munny, Unforgiven<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
ndru<br />
<br />
Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 175<br />
<br />
From:ann arbor,mi,usa<br />
<br />
Registered: Dec 1999<br />
<br />
posted 11-06-2000 09:45 PM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
I guess an important thing to realize is, with books/theatre/movies, the writer/director has control of the story, but with games, the player has the control.<br />
<br />
A great game story would have to play up to this aspect... which is something traditional story telling hasn't done, or had a need to so far.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
frobber<br />
<br />
Junior Member<br />
<br />
Posts: 10<br />
<br />
From:Massachusetts, USA<br />
<br />
Registered: Nov 2000<br />
<br />
posted 11-07-2000 07:20 AM<br />
<br />
-----<br />
<br />
Here are my thoughts on reacting to the previous few postings...<br />
<br />
One of the sacred cows of gaming is its non-linearity -- and this is a major barrier to story telling in a game. A great story is like a mighty river that winds through the landscape and delivers the goods in the end. A game is more like a swamp with no current of its own where the player explores until he or she is done. At least that is my experience as very amateur level builder where I preplaced my story elements hoping that the player would find them when paddling here and there.<br />
<br />
I believe that setting/atmosphere is the third most important element of a story after premise and character. So certainly attention to detail in this area will allow the gaming experience to feel more like a story -- but it won't turn it into a story in and of itself.<br />
<br />
Of course there are ways in which settings can lend depth to characters -- for example, recently-constructed places like Constantine's house or Angelwatch and Soulforge say a whole lot about the power-mad characters who built them. In general, though, settings speak more about the past --or back story-- than about the present day characters. I can walk around the cobbled streets of Boston, but this does not say that I will run into Paul Revere. The "factions, technology, and magic" are probably more important to the story aspects of Thief because of how this speaks somewhat more directly to nature of the characters we will meet.<br />
<br />
Certainly, the intro and cut scenes in Thief lend a lot of weight to the story telling experience -- mainly because of how these very traditional and linear aspects are presented as a story. And having these in mind while in the interactive game itself deepens the overall immersion experience.<br />
<br />
Yes, the big difference between games and linear stories is control of what happens. A traditional story unfolds as it is delivered to a passive audience. While the gaming experience unfolds as the "audience" actively pursues the action.<br />
<br />
In both cases the audience is living for a time through the eyes of the main character(s) -- its just that in one case the character makes his/her own decisions, and in the other, where we make the decisions for him/her. Perhaps the most startling example of this difference is the "Cutty" scene in Break from Cragscleft Prison where suddenly Garrett has a linear conversation with Cutty out of our control -- is this now a game that we are experiencing? or is it now a story?<br />
<br />
I agree that Thief 1 was far more coherent and engaging than Thief 2 -- and it is interesting to read about the possible reasons for this. At least in the development offices it seems that there needs to be a story -- even if later it will be played out as a game.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Plot_Development_(Part_Six)&diff=4146Plot Development (Part Six)2005-06-07T17:22:49Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>INDUCING REALITY<br />
The Holy Grail of Storytelling<br />
<br />
by Ken "frobber" Ramsley<br />
<br />
Part 6<br />
<br />
RE-WRITING -- WHAT WE REALLY DO!<br />
<br />
It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and THEN do your best.<br />
<br />
W. Edwards Deming<br />
<br />
<br />
=BURIED ORDNANCE=<br />
<br />
Once the basics are in place ... premise, character, setting, and roughed-out events ... the task now for the writer or game designer is fixing, reworking, and cleaning up the mess -- that is, tossing out the garbage, adding new (and better) material, and polishing every element that makes its way into the final draft.<br />
<br />
Among wannabe writers of his time, Ernest Hemingway was famous for claiming to rewrite every paragraph at least 50 times before releasing it for public consumption. This might be overkill in an age of spell-checkers and other digital tools, but it does serve to illustrate the point -- everything we write can benefit from rewriting ... or said the way it really comes to mind ... nothing written is ever perfect from beginning to end as it spews out of the writer's fingertips.<br />
<br />
But that is easier said than done, because rewriting is more like walking through a minefield of possible screw-ups than any sort of certain process. Fixing a creative work can just as easily ruin it. So inasmuch as how I don't normally define anything by "what it is not" -- perhaps the best way to describe this rewriting process is to point out the more common buried ordinance along the pathway for success.<br />
<br />
I'll address these in the order that they afflict my own writing...<br />
<br />
=REAL-TIME EDITING=<br />
<br />
As I write something for the first time, I have noticed how the creative process very often excludes the objectivity needed to see mistakes along the way. As I type right now, for instance, I am taking my best shot at saying what I want to say -- but not until I switch into detail-editing-mode can I see how this is okay or not.<br />
<br />
With practice, though, I have gotten better at real-time editing. I can now detect excessive repetition, and my internal sense of rhythm and pacing keeps me from piling too much in one place. My spelling is still terrible, and I am all thumbs on the keyboard -- but that is no reason to stop typing when I'm on a roll.<br />
<br />
Only the worst of what I write gets hacked out immediately. The rest of the drivel is processed after I have written several paragraphs --when I take a more objective look at the details. But I don't stop after every word or phrase to rewrite what I have just said.<br />
<br />
Too much of a stop-and-go writing style only serves to crash my concentration --which is pointless-- given how I can always fix anything later.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=EDITING IN DETAIL=<br />
<br />
Detail editing involves removing repetition and replacing words and phrases with better terms and expressions. I will also remove points developed here that have already been developed better elsewhere. And I will rip out my sacred cows at this stage as well -- phrases and sentences that may sound cool, but don't support the point I am trying to make. Sometimes I rearrange the order of sentences, paragraphs, and whole sections if needed.<br />
<br />
Personally, though, I have a hard time objectively editing my own work. Printing it out can help, but I would rather edit on-screen. So one of my favorite approaches is to publish my rough drafts on a website somewhere and then read it on-line with a browser. Somehow this distance allows me to see it as though I were reading someone else's material.<br />
<br />
Another useful trick I play on myself is to make promises about when I will deliver this material to someone else for comments and feedback. This self-imposed deadline seems to kick in a different way of looking, since now I am on the hook to actually show this to someone else (in fact this is my motivation for publishing anything -- since without a critical audience I might not work so hard to make my points.)<br />
<br />
My other main trick is to leave the material lying fallow for a few days before I plan to read it for the last time. That way I can not remember exactly how I said everything, and perhaps now notice mistakes that "weren't there before!"<br />
<br />
Or course, I'm only talking here about editing an essay -- but editing anything uses the same basic process of taking an objective look and seeing how things can be made better.<br />
<br />
If in doubt chop it out, because a good idea is always easier to see in fewer words.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=RE-WRITING TRIPWIRES=<br />
<br />
Ham-handed editing is one of the more popular ways to mangle a story. But not the only way. Sometimes we are too conservative. Sometimes too witty. Often we write something that makes perfect sense to us -- but it makes no sense to anyone else. The minefield is littered with all sorts of potential disasters like this -- any one of which can ruin a good story.<br />
<br />
Here are several notorious tripwires in the rewriting minefield that I have discovered...<br />
<br />
=The "Big Scene"=<br />
<br />
Many writers get started by jotting down a powerful scene or sequence of cool dialogue -- and the rest of the story gets written around this. But unless this tidbit quickly turns into a clear definition of the premise, it will do nothing more than drag the whole story down. As a personal aside on the this point, what I am writing today actually started when I jotted down a diatribe blasted out of nowhere. But once I got down to making my case, I found that these notes did nothing to support any points I had planned to make -- so this space is now filled with something else.<br />
<br />
The big scene becomes a problem when the writer keeps running with it before there is a point in mind, and once it achieves a certain central location, the writer can no longer imagine the story without it. Perhaps after a few of these great scenes it may even look like the writer has is a winner here ... until the sticky glue gets applied to hold all the disjointed pieces together, and the so-called "story" turns into a gooey mess that nobody can fix.<br />
<br />
By "the glue" I refer to those trite and quite unbelievable contrivances we see in many bad films ... the totally implausible subplots and lousy dialog which only exist to hold the monster together as it writhes through the projection machine, or across the pages of a book, or through the course of some terrible computer game. These events, or the words that get said, are only there to set up the sacred scenes. And it is a miserable experience to behold for all.<br />
<br />
This is not to say that writing loose scenes is a bad idea early on. I write a lot of drivel in search of new ideas -- but once I know what I want to say, I pitch it all and start from scratch. Anything that is worth keeping will leak back in, and the rest will not be worth saving.<br />
<br />
Once you know what you want to say, then toss out the sacred cows and rewrite everything from scratch with the premise centrally in mind. Amazingly, most sacred cows will not be as good as the new material that gets created.<br />
<br />
=High-Concept=<br />
<br />
High concept places a quirky idea in the role of the premise, and almost always this takes on the form of a "what if..." statement like... "What if suddenly there were no gravity?" or "What if there were a volcano in downtown Los Angeles?" Many situational comedies are high-concept in nature by creating unusual (and unlikely) scenarios among people... "What if a communist and a right-wing fascist were room mates?" There is nothing wrong with this per se, but the problem comes when the need for proving the premise is constrained -- which is often the case.<br />
<br />
The high concept is not a point -- yet it takes center-stage as though it were the point. One person is a communist, the other a fascist, and there isn't much that can change without ruining the gag. It is a fixed situation that can not be challenged -- sort of like some silly antagonist who has actually won, and now everyone is just trying to make the best of it. An audience may have a long wait to see if the characters ever actually bother to fight the battle --already having lost the war.<br />
<br />
There are rare examples of high-concept stories that can be made to work. Men in Black is very much high-concept in nature ... "What if the tabloids were true?" But this story works because of how the concept is retooled as a premise -- the tabloids are true, and what you read really does happen, and rather than taking this for granted, the whole point of the movie is set up to prove this point. But a high-concept which has not been converted into a premise will fail to prove anything beyond showing how many ways this situation creates a confusing mess in the lives of the characters.<br />
<br />
It is much easier to start with a premise, then pull in cool what-if ideas to help prove it, than to start with a what-if high-concept and try to shoehorn a premise into the scheme.<br />
<br />
=Melodrama=<br />
<br />
Melodrama happens when every character is a stereotype with no reason for being who they are or doing what they do. The characters overplay their rolls and their excessive presence dominates the experience of the audience. Soap Operas are melodramas. Everything happens in endless overt detail. Everyone overreaches and overreacts. Nothing is left to the imagination. Everything is way beyond larger-than-life. The patient has cancer, a bad heart, liver trouble, bankruptcy, girlfriend problems, a lost twin brother in jail, and a contract out on his life -- all in one episode.<br />
<br />
Melodramas are charades that masquerade as stories. There is no premise, there isn't even any real attempt at fixing the dilemma. The whole point is to go beyond plausibility and to have impossible characters facing impossible situations.<br />
<br />
Under very narrow circumstances, some melodramatic methods can be made to work. A farce, for example, is a melodramatic device used to illustrate a point through huge exaggerations. But this sort of overplaying should only happen sparingly, and should always focus on proving the premise.<br />
<br />
=Anticlimax=<br />
<br />
Anticlimax happens when the temperature of the story peaks too early. The audience will look for more, and when nothing else measures up, they'll start to ignore pretty much everything after this early peak. I once had a great moment midway through a screenplay where the protagonist escapes doom in a most dramatic fashion. But the scene was so powerful that it killed the rest of the movie. And only after I changed the scene --leaving it unclear as to whether or the not protagonist escapes-- could the story continue with any interest.<br />
<br />
Another problem happens when too much is put into the epilogue. The story is over and the audience does not want to see any more. So any action beyond tying up a few loose ends will drain away whatever good feelings the audience had about the real climax of the story.<br />
<br />
If you have a scene which genuinely proves the premise in a convincing and fitting way, and it is the strongest scene in the story -- then it either needs to be set at the highest peak of the concluding sequence of scenes, or else it needs to be trimmed back so that it does not overshadow the rest of the story.<br />
<br />
=Explaining=<br />
<br />
Stories should never stop to tell the audience what is happening (except perhaps as a comic gag). Everything which is worth knowing should already have been pre-planted. For example, in James Cameron's movie Titanic, there is an early scene where we learn about the technicalities of how the ship sinks. Later, when we see this actually happening, there is no need to freeze-frame while somebody explains how the ship breaks in half. The story just keeps on rolling because we were already told what to expect.<br />
<br />
If anything needs to be explained -- do it early. And if the explanation is taking too long, either simplify it or see if you can leave it out altogether. Perhaps the audiences can just dig into their own experience... or maybe they won't even care to know all the technicalities. For example, is it really necessary for George Lucas to tell us in Star Wars: Episode1 how "The Force" actually works? ...or show us the cute-looking kid who someday turns into the big bad Darth Vader? Good grief!!<br />
<br />
If you must introduce a new concept or technical point, for the sake of your audience keep it simple and only explain what really needs to be made clear -- and then do it early enough so that it doesn't stink up the action.<br />
<br />
=Dialogue Versus Action=<br />
<br />
What happens in a story is far more more important than what the characters have to say about it. This is not to imply that characters should not speak. I simply mean that the writer must show what happens, and what happens needs to be more than characters sitting around talking about what they want to do, or what they think about some other character. Dialogue is only convincing in the context of the action. Han Solo's pithy remarks reveal his bravado when he's in the heat of battle -- but they come close to dropping dead on the floor when nothing much is happening.<br />
<br />
Good dialogue confirms and punctuates what we already sense about the characters. It fills in the details and rounds out the edges of who they are. But dialogue is no substitute for action. What the characters decide, what they do, how they react to success and failure -- that is what defines them in the rough. Good dialogue can help us see the characters more clearly and perhaps learn about secondary elements of the story. But the audience is not a jury weighing every word the characters say, and to tell the story through dialogue as the main vehicle will leave most members of the audience exhausted. Not everyone is up for an evening of My Dinner With Andre.<br />
<br />
Stage plays (which are mostly dialogue) get around this problem by having the actors tell each other stories (for the most part), and in so doing their dialogue contains a measure of information about the actions of others. But in movies --and particularly in computer games-- this will not work, because on-screen --where anything can happen-- actions will always speak louder than words.<br />
<br />
=Incestuous Writing=<br />
<br />
It is bad form for music to be about musicians, painting about painters, or stories about writers. And I get more than a little nervous when a computer game makes a "hacker" the hero.<br />
<br />
Of course I tread close to this self-imposed taboo by writing this series. But I will never do it in a story. Stories should transport us a little distance, and frankly I don't want a story about the life of a person writing a story -- unless it is someone whose life is unique and interesting in some other major way. If all of your ideas revolve around sitting at a keyboard -- then the time has come for you to see the real world.<br />
<br />
And when you come back from your real-life adventure you will have something new to say.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Plot_Development_(Part_Five)&diff=4145Plot Development (Part Five)2005-06-07T17:21:16Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>INDUCING REALITY<br />
The Holy Grail of Storytelling<br />
<br />
by Ken "frobber" Ramsley<br />
<br />
Part 5<br />
<br />
SELECTING THE DETAILS<br />
<br />
<br />
Making the simple complicated is commonplace;<br />
making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.<br />
<br />
Charles Mingus<br />
<br />
=SAYING MORE WITH LESS=<br />
<br />
Real life is far more complex than any story ever written. If I were to fully record what actually happens during even the most mundane events in real life, there would not be enough room in my computer to hold all of the images, characters, viewpoints, and memories -- and nobody would want to experience this mountain of information even if I could somehow capture every detail.<br />
<br />
A story must be selective.<br />
<br />
Instead of portraying all the characters who might live in a setting, the writer needs to pick out a representative few. Instead of showing everything that actually could happen in a real-life situation, the writer needs to trim down to just a handful representative events.<br />
<br />
A full-length motion picture screenplay, for example, contains about as much material as a 70-page book and lasts on-screen for about two hours. A 300-page novel can be read in a weekend, and a computer game can be played in a week or two -- and yet we live our lives on this Earth for decades. So how can I possibly make a complete and unabridged statement about humanity using just seventy pages? ...or three hundred pages? Or even a gigabyte of graphics and sound files on a computer disk?<br />
<br />
And yet this is all the space I have to tell my story.<br />
<br />
=MOTIF=<br />
<br />
A long time ago playwrights discovered how people in the audience dislike extraneous events which only show up once in a story -- for example, a minor character who has a brief entrance, says one thing, and then leaves for good. During the rest of the entire play the audience will keep this character in their inventory -- and when the character fails to return, the audience will feel a sense of wasted effort.<br />
<br />
The same can be said about everything else in a story. When anything happens, the audience will hold this event within their inventory of story elements, and if these threads are never picked up again they may be annoyed to discover how the loose ends went nowhere.<br />
<br />
As an early practical solution to both the problems of fitting the story into a small space and the demands of the audience to avoid extraneous material, playwrights and other artists developed a sort of shorthand of recurring themes, symbols, and mannerisms -- all of which can be introduced at length, then reused without further introduction as the story unfolds. A recurring element like this is called a motif [mow-TEEF].<br />
<br />
Early in Episode 28 of the original Star Trek series we see how Spock must cover his Vulcan ears to avoid suspicion from 1930's New Yorkers (as though anyone there would have noticed!). But as the story unfolds, he is simply wearing his hat all the time as a constant reminder of how out-of-place these events really are. Nothing more is said about the hat. It's just there making the point over and over. We also see how Sulu is injured by a flash of electronics shorting out -- just as we see this again when Spock's memory machine fails. And we see how Spock and Kirk steal clothes out of desperation just as they later "borrow" tools for the same reason.<br />
<br />
Once a motif is set, it can be used repeatedly just like a familiar sequence of notes in a symphony, or a certain pattern of colors in a painting, or a simple gesture from a character. And through this device more can be said with less because the writer can now tell the story with fewer unique pieces, while the audience can absorb the story without having track so many loose elements that never show up again.<br />
<br />
Here are some other shorthand techniques...<br />
<br />
=ALLUSION and GENRE=<br />
<br />
Through the use of motif we can greatly reduce the complexity of a story, yet even with this shorthand of recurring elements there is still a limit to how many new elements can be introduced during any one story.<br />
<br />
But what if the writer could borrow established motifs by just assuming that the audience has already experienced these in other stories?<br />
<br />
This is exactly what happens all the time.<br />
<br />
By borrowing from other stories, the writer only needs to introduce those elements which are truly new and unique to his/her own story. For example, instead of showing all the details associated with traveling by airplane, perhaps the character is only shown leaving the airport in a cab -- because we have all seen pieces of other stories that show us what air travel is like. Or when a space ship goes into "hyperdrive" -- we have don't need to have this explained because Star Trek and Star Wars have made this the standard solution for traveling faster-than-light.<br />
<br />
When these shortcuts happen --when the writer mines the treasure trove of established ideas and ways of saying things-- he/she is tapping into what we call genre [ZHON-ra].<br />
<br />
As a small example, observe my parenthetical remark about Spock's ears and New Yorkers in the previous section above. In this I allude strongly to the big joke in Men in Black where aliens are required to stay in New York City because of how this is the one place where nobody would notice. And in this way, writers borrow constantly from other stories because of how it saves on the need to explain everything.<br />
<br />
The look, the feel, the colors, the sounds -- everything can be borrowed. And when this happens --as it should-- stories begin to take on a somewhat familiar flavor, thus easing the decoding chore of the audience and freeing the writer to concentrate on making the main point.<br />
<br />
In the end, this borrowing results in a type of story -- like a western, or science fiction, or historical drama, or comedy, or fantasy, and as we apply these labels we are assigning the story to an established genre.<br />
<br />
There is nothing sacred about genre and there is nothing about it that keeps the writer from exploring new territory. It is only there in a practical function. In fact, new genres are are evolving all the time. Men in Black, for example, breaks new ground as a blend of two genres -- science fiction and situational comedy, whereas before this film almost all science fiction was serious drama, and almost all comedy stuck to more mundane events. Computer games have genres, too, and over time the treasure trove of available ideas has grown from "Pong" and "Pac Man" to games about war, skateboarding, car racing, football, and a host of others including sneaking around old castles to steal from rich guys.<br />
<br />
<br />
=COMEDY AND TRAGEDY=<br />
<br />
Going all the way back to the beginning of story telling, every story has fallen into two basic genres -- comedy and tragedy. In fact, the whole happy-face sad-face motif on playbills originates with the ancient Greeks who made a big point of this distinction. A tragedy relieves rising tension by allowing the protagonist to survive each conflict with some hope of continuing the battle. Whereas a comedy relieves rising tension by poking fun.<br />
<br />
Hollywood has discovered that a slight blending of both techniques sometimes works even better, such as in Stars Wars where all kinds of crazy thing are getting said in the heat of battle -- especially when Han Solo is around. Yet ultimately the Star Wars series is a tragedy because of how Luke finally saves his father only to have him die soon afterwards.<br />
<br />
The groundbreaking TV series MASH, on the other hand is basically a comedy which often includes serious material (and sometimes whole episodes) in order to keep the overall story from turning into a melodramatic farce.<br />
<br />
Tragedy is used inside a comedy to keep it from getting too light, just as comedy is used inside a tragedy to keep it from getting too heavy. But no story should completely cross the boundary between comedy and tragedy once it gets rolling -- certainly never after the midpoint crisis. Otherwise the audience will not know if they should be laughing or crying ...taking the story as a joke, or taking it seriously.<br />
<br />
=FORESHADOWING=<br />
<br />
Every important story element should be shown in some form early in the story in order to prepare the audience for critical scenes which come later -- when the pace has picked up and there is no longer any time left to explain anything. Foreshadowing is a special use of motifs just for this purpose.<br />
<br />
The whole idea of foreshadowing rests on what I've been saying about the prologue -- the audience has no idea what anything means near the beginning of a story. Anything can happen early and still not say too much. Motifs used to as foreshadowing lay in all of the critical story elements in order to plant these ideas firmly before they become the central focus of the action later on -- when there is no time left to explain anything.<br />
<br />
Early in Episode 28 of the original Star Trek series we see several foreshadowing events... Spock berates himself for failing to record history as it flashes through the time machine annulus. Kirk dives for McCoy as McCoy runs into the portal, hitting the deck hard with is arms wrapped around thin air. Kirk and Spock escape from a New York City cop with Kirk saying, "lets get out of here!" Of course these three elements seem fairly ordinary -- until we see how Spock's recording is central to their success... Or how the next time Kirk grabs for McCoy, this time he keeps McCoy from saving Edith Keeler... Or just after escaping from their trap in time, how Kirk once again talks about leaving, but this time adding the "h" word for good measure (which almost kept the episode from airing in 1967).<br />
<br />
The other day I saw the best example yet of foreshadowing on the DVD jacket for the movie Planet of the Apes. Here, painted in exquisite detail, is the final climatic mind-blowing scene of the whole movie -- but without knowing the story, nothing is spoiled and instead the image is simply pre-planted for maximum impact once the truth is finally revealed on-screen.<br />
<br />
Consider everything that will happen at critical moments in your story and make sure that it has already happened in some other way nearer the beginning. By doing this the audience is set up to recognize these images immediately for what they are and what they mean. Or as the pros say -- "plant it it early!"<br />
<br />
=CHARACTER FOIBLES=<br />
<br />
Characters are the most complicated elements of any story, which means that considerable attention needs to be paid when developing motifs for everyone in the story. Dialogue is particularly troublesome, because characters, like real people, could very well say just about anything at any time. But a character can't do this without totally confusing the audience.<br />
<br />
Just as how events are recycled, characters need to reuse various mannerisms and catch phrases. For example, Han Solo has a bad feeling about a lot of things -- and we get what he means without anything else being said. C3-P0 shuffles along and gets flustered in much the same way throughout all of the Star Wars movies, and notice how much mileage George Lucas gets out of R2-D2's various whistles and buzzings.<br />
<br />
Character foibles and mannerisms say a whole lot even when they are saying very little. But this can only work if the characters are well-developed early in the story. The audience must understand exactly what the mannerism or catch phrase means when they first see it in the character. Otherwise this shorthand will leave the audience wondering what the character is really trying to say.<br />
<br />
A major task of live actors is to present these mannerisms in an authentic way, but the writer can't depend on the actors to bail him out. Until the movie or game is made, there is only the written version of the story -- so the writer must consider absolutely everything the characters can do, and use these elements to say more with less.<br />
<br />
<br />
=CARVING UP YOUR CHARACTERS=<br />
<br />
One trick screenwriters use to save tons of room is inventing just a handful of characters, then slicing them into several people at different ages (and even different genders). The boy, the man, the grandfather, and the cousin can sometimes all be the same basic character seen in various forms. And by doing this, the common elements of these character-sets can bring about a quick sense of familiarity -- saving time you would otherwise waste introducing a bunch of minor players. This is such a powerful tool that most writers won't tell you about it -- nothing beats a great character more than having the same character in many forms. Is not Obi-Wan Kenobi really just an older version of Luke Skywalker? (Or George Lucas, for that matter.)<br />
<br />
Of course these sub-characters take different paths and tend to evolve into unique people, but only insofar as they need to. In every other way they can be nearly the same, and by doing this the writer simplifies the economy of the story -- saving precious space and time to say what is truly different, and unique, and central to proving the premise. There simply is no time for most things to happen in different ways when they could just as easily happen in the same way -- so why not create fewer characters that you slice up and reuse everywhere?<br />
<br />
<br />
=OTHER SHORT-HANDS=<br />
<br />
Creating motifs can take any form. In Men in Black we see bugs everywhere because the antagonist is a bug. In Stars Wars the light sabers of the Jedi say so much about battle and the minimal use of force to achieve spectacular ends. In Apollo 13, Jim Lovell watches the Moon drifting by the window of his crippled command module and without saying a word we know what this means -- that he will never get to walk there. In ET, the plant is dying and dying, then suddenly is revived -- and we now know that the Alien is alive again.<br />
<br />
Writing stories is very much the process of creating these motifs -- the basic elements of the story -- then using and reusing them to build what happens in the most meaningful ways possible. Much can be said with the smallest of details once we know what they mean.<br />
<br />
As you begin to see possibilities for motifs in your own story, take a moment to consider everything about each element that seems important and how it might be reused from beginning to end. In Apollo 13, for example, the story begins with the real-life launch-pad fire of Apollo 1 where three American astronauts are incinerated, and as the story unfolds we see how this motif of fire shows up at every major turning point in the movie. The fire comes up in the beginning with the Apollo 1 pad disaster ...it comes up again when Jim Lovell explains the risks to his family before his mission ...it comes up during problems with their training It comes up at the launch of the massive Saturn 5 rocket It come up one more time when the service module explodes ...and finally, it comes up during the climactic sequence as the crew reenters the Earth's atmosphere like a human-occupied fireball with no clear idea if they are on-course or doomed to a fiery death themselves.<br />
<br />
Consider the details and how you can reuse them to drive home each part of the storytelling experience. Your story will say far more with far less, and leave your audience much more satisfied with the results.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Plot_Development_(Part_Five)&diff=34Plot Development (Part Five)2005-06-07T17:20:42Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>INDUCING REALITY<br />
The Holy Grail of Storytelling<br />
<br />
by Ken "frobber" Ramsley<br />
<br />
Part 5<br />
<br />
==SELECTING THE DETAILS==<br />
<br />
<br />
Making the simple complicated is commonplace;<br />
making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.<br />
<br />
Charles Mingus<br />
<br />
=SAYING MORE WITH LESS=<br />
<br />
Real life is far more complex than any story ever written. If I were to fully record what actually happens during even the most mundane events in real life, there would not be enough room in my computer to hold all of the images, characters, viewpoints, and memories -- and nobody would want to experience this mountain of information even if I could somehow capture every detail.<br />
<br />
A story must be selective.<br />
<br />
Instead of portraying all the characters who might live in a setting, the writer needs to pick out a representative few. Instead of showing everything that actually could happen in a real-life situation, the writer needs to trim down to just a handful representative events.<br />
<br />
A full-length motion picture screenplay, for example, contains about as much material as a 70-page book and lasts on-screen for about two hours. A 300-page novel can be read in a weekend, and a computer game can be played in a week or two -- and yet we live our lives on this Earth for decades. So how can I possibly make a complete and unabridged statement about humanity using just seventy pages? ...or three hundred pages? Or even a gigabyte of graphics and sound files on a computer disk?<br />
<br />
And yet this is all the space I have to tell my story.<br />
<br />
=MOTIF=<br />
<br />
A long time ago playwrights discovered how people in the audience dislike extraneous events which only show up once in a story -- for example, a minor character who has a brief entrance, says one thing, and then leaves for good. During the rest of the entire play the audience will keep this character in their inventory -- and when the character fails to return, the audience will feel a sense of wasted effort.<br />
<br />
The same can be said about everything else in a story. When anything happens, the audience will hold this event within their inventory of story elements, and if these threads are never picked up again they may be annoyed to discover how the loose ends went nowhere.<br />
<br />
As an early practical solution to both the problems of fitting the story into a small space and the demands of the audience to avoid extraneous material, playwrights and other artists developed a sort of shorthand of recurring themes, symbols, and mannerisms -- all of which can be introduced at length, then reused without further introduction as the story unfolds. A recurring element like this is called a motif [mow-TEEF].<br />
<br />
Early in Episode 28 of the original Star Trek series we see how Spock must cover his Vulcan ears to avoid suspicion from 1930's New Yorkers (as though anyone there would have noticed!). But as the story unfolds, he is simply wearing his hat all the time as a constant reminder of how out-of-place these events really are. Nothing more is said about the hat. It's just there making the point over and over. We also see how Sulu is injured by a flash of electronics shorting out -- just as we see this again when Spock's memory machine fails. And we see how Spock and Kirk steal clothes out of desperation just as they later "borrow" tools for the same reason.<br />
<br />
Once a motif is set, it can be used repeatedly just like a familiar sequence of notes in a symphony, or a certain pattern of colors in a painting, or a simple gesture from a character. And through this device more can be said with less because the writer can now tell the story with fewer unique pieces, while the audience can absorb the story without having track so many loose elements that never show up again.<br />
<br />
Here are some other shorthand techniques...<br />
<br />
=ALLUSION and GENRE=<br />
<br />
Through the use of motif we can greatly reduce the complexity of a story, yet even with this shorthand of recurring elements there is still a limit to how many new elements can be introduced during any one story.<br />
<br />
But what if the writer could borrow established motifs by just assuming that the audience has already experienced these in other stories?<br />
<br />
This is exactly what happens all the time.<br />
<br />
By borrowing from other stories, the writer only needs to introduce those elements which are truly new and unique to his/her own story. For example, instead of showing all the details associated with traveling by airplane, perhaps the character is only shown leaving the airport in a cab -- because we have all seen pieces of other stories that show us what air travel is like. Or when a space ship goes into "hyperdrive" -- we have don't need to have this explained because Star Trek and Star Wars have made this the standard solution for traveling faster-than-light.<br />
<br />
When these shortcuts happen --when the writer mines the treasure trove of established ideas and ways of saying things-- he/she is tapping into what we call genre [ZHON-ra].<br />
<br />
As a small example, observe my parenthetical remark about Spock's ears and New Yorkers in the previous section above. In this I allude strongly to the big joke in Men in Black where aliens are required to stay in New York City because of how this is the one place where nobody would notice. And in this way, writers borrow constantly from other stories because of how it saves on the need to explain everything.<br />
<br />
The look, the feel, the colors, the sounds -- everything can be borrowed. And when this happens --as it should-- stories begin to take on a somewhat familiar flavor, thus easing the decoding chore of the audience and freeing the writer to concentrate on making the main point.<br />
<br />
In the end, this borrowing results in a type of story -- like a western, or science fiction, or historical drama, or comedy, or fantasy, and as we apply these labels we are assigning the story to an established genre.<br />
<br />
There is nothing sacred about genre and there is nothing about it that keeps the writer from exploring new territory. It is only there in a practical function. In fact, new genres are are evolving all the time. Men in Black, for example, breaks new ground as a blend of two genres -- science fiction and situational comedy, whereas before this film almost all science fiction was serious drama, and almost all comedy stuck to more mundane events. Computer games have genres, too, and over time the treasure trove of available ideas has grown from "Pong" and "Pac Man" to games about war, skateboarding, car racing, football, and a host of others including sneaking around old castles to steal from rich guys.<br />
<br />
<br />
=COMEDY AND TRAGEDY=<br />
<br />
Going all the way back to the beginning of story telling, every story has fallen into two basic genres -- comedy and tragedy. In fact, the whole happy-face sad-face motif on playbills originates with the ancient Greeks who made a big point of this distinction. A tragedy relieves rising tension by allowing the protagonist to survive each conflict with some hope of continuing the battle. Whereas a comedy relieves rising tension by poking fun.<br />
<br />
Hollywood has discovered that a slight blending of both techniques sometimes works even better, such as in Stars Wars where all kinds of crazy thing are getting said in the heat of battle -- especially when Han Solo is around. Yet ultimately the Star Wars series is a tragedy because of how Luke finally saves his father only to have him die soon afterwards.<br />
<br />
The groundbreaking TV series MASH, on the other hand is basically a comedy which often includes serious material (and sometimes whole episodes) in order to keep the overall story from turning into a melodramatic farce.<br />
<br />
Tragedy is used inside a comedy to keep it from getting too light, just as comedy is used inside a tragedy to keep it from getting too heavy. But no story should completely cross the boundary between comedy and tragedy once it gets rolling -- certainly never after the midpoint crisis. Otherwise the audience will not know if they should be laughing or crying ...taking the story as a joke, or taking it seriously.<br />
<br />
=FORESHADOWING=<br />
<br />
Every important story element should be shown in some form early in the story in order to prepare the audience for critical scenes which come later -- when the pace has picked up and there is no longer any time left to explain anything. Foreshadowing is a special use of motifs just for this purpose.<br />
<br />
The whole idea of foreshadowing rests on what I've been saying about the prologue -- the audience has no idea what anything means near the beginning of a story. Anything can happen early and still not say too much. Motifs used to as foreshadowing lay in all of the critical story elements in order to plant these ideas firmly before they become the central focus of the action later on -- when there is no time left to explain anything.<br />
<br />
Early in Episode 28 of the original Star Trek series we see several foreshadowing events... Spock berates himself for failing to record history as it flashes through the time machine annulus. Kirk dives for McCoy as McCoy runs into the portal, hitting the deck hard with is arms wrapped around thin air. Kirk and Spock escape from a New York City cop with Kirk saying, "lets get out of here!" Of course these three elements seem fairly ordinary -- until we see how Spock's recording is central to their success... Or how the next time Kirk grabs for McCoy, this time he keeps McCoy from saving Edith Keeler... Or just after escaping from their trap in time, how Kirk once again talks about leaving, but this time adding the "h" word for good measure (which almost kept the episode from airing in 1967).<br />
<br />
The other day I saw the best example yet of foreshadowing on the DVD jacket for the movie Planet of the Apes. Here, painted in exquisite detail, is the final climatic mind-blowing scene of the whole movie -- but without knowing the story, nothing is spoiled and instead the image is simply pre-planted for maximum impact once the truth is finally revealed on-screen.<br />
<br />
Consider everything that will happen at critical moments in your story and make sure that it has already happened in some other way nearer the beginning. By doing this the audience is set up to recognize these images immediately for what they are and what they mean. Or as the pros say -- "plant it it early!"<br />
<br />
=CHARACTER FOIBLES=<br />
<br />
Characters are the most complicated elements of any story, which means that considerable attention needs to be paid when developing motifs for everyone in the story. Dialogue is particularly troublesome, because characters, like real people, could very well say just about anything at any time. But a character can't do this without totally confusing the audience.<br />
<br />
Just as how events are recycled, characters need to reuse various mannerisms and catch phrases. For example, Han Solo has a bad feeling about a lot of things -- and we get what he means without anything else being said. C3-P0 shuffles along and gets flustered in much the same way throughout all of the Star Wars movies, and notice how much mileage George Lucas gets out of R2-D2's various whistles and buzzings.<br />
<br />
Character foibles and mannerisms say a whole lot even when they are saying very little. But this can only work if the characters are well-developed early in the story. The audience must understand exactly what the mannerism or catch phrase means when they first see it in the character. Otherwise this shorthand will leave the audience wondering what the character is really trying to say.<br />
<br />
A major task of live actors is to present these mannerisms in an authentic way, but the writer can't depend on the actors to bail him out. Until the movie or game is made, there is only the written version of the story -- so the writer must consider absolutely everything the characters can do, and use these elements to say more with less.<br />
<br />
<br />
=CARVING UP YOUR CHARACTERS=<br />
<br />
One trick screenwriters use to save tons of room is inventing just a handful of characters, then slicing them into several people at different ages (and even different genders). The boy, the man, the grandfather, and the cousin can sometimes all be the same basic character seen in various forms. And by doing this, the common elements of these character-sets can bring about a quick sense of familiarity -- saving time you would otherwise waste introducing a bunch of minor players. This is such a powerful tool that most writers won't tell you about it -- nothing beats a great character more than having the same character in many forms. Is not Obi-Wan Kenobi really just an older version of Luke Skywalker? (Or George Lucas, for that matter.)<br />
<br />
Of course these sub-characters take different paths and tend to evolve into unique people, but only insofar as they need to. In every other way they can be nearly the same, and by doing this the writer simplifies the economy of the story -- saving precious space and time to say what is truly different, and unique, and central to proving the premise. There simply is no time for most things to happen in different ways when they could just as easily happen in the same way -- so why not create fewer characters that you slice up and reuse everywhere?<br />
<br />
<br />
=OTHER SHORT-HANDS=<br />
<br />
Creating motifs can take any form. In Men in Black we see bugs everywhere because the antagonist is a bug. In Stars Wars the light sabers of the Jedi say so much about battle and the minimal use of force to achieve spectacular ends. In Apollo 13, Jim Lovell watches the Moon drifting by the window of his crippled command module and without saying a word we know what this means -- that he will never get to walk there. In ET, the plant is dying and dying, then suddenly is revived -- and we now know that the Alien is alive again.<br />
<br />
Writing stories is very much the process of creating these motifs -- the basic elements of the story -- then using and reusing them to build what happens in the most meaningful ways possible. Much can be said with the smallest of details once we know what they mean.<br />
<br />
As you begin to see possibilities for motifs in your own story, take a moment to consider everything about each element that seems important and how it might be reused from beginning to end. In Apollo 13, for example, the story begins with the real-life launch-pad fire of Apollo 1 where three American astronauts are incinerated, and as the story unfolds we see how this motif of fire shows up at every major turning point in the movie. The fire comes up in the beginning with the Apollo 1 pad disaster ...it comes up again when Jim Lovell explains the risks to his family before his mission ...it comes up during problems with their training It comes up at the launch of the massive Saturn 5 rocket It come up one more time when the service module explodes ...and finally, it comes up during the climactic sequence as the crew reenters the Earth's atmosphere like a human-occupied fireball with no clear idea if they are on-course or doomed to a fiery death themselves.<br />
<br />
Consider the details and how you can reuse them to drive home each part of the storytelling experience. Your story will say far more with far less, and leave your audience much more satisfied with the results.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Plot_Development_(Part_Four)&diff=4144Plot Development (Part Four)2005-06-07T17:19:11Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>INDUCING REALITY<br />
The Holy Grail of Storytelling<br />
<br />
by Ken "frobber" Ramsley<br />
<br />
Part 4<br />
<br />
DESIGNING THE STORY<br />
<br />
<br />
The music is so beautiful ... I can hardly believe I wrote it myself<br />
<br />
George Gershwin<br />
<br />
=TRUCKERS AND ROAD BUILDERS=<br />
<br />
Creating a story and experiencing it as a member of the audience are two entirely different endeavors. A member of the audience is like a truck driver taking in the road as he drives along. He may not notice the small bridges and culverts, or the special grading and embankments, or the steel beams and concrete, or just about anything beyond the pavement and the painted lines. The driver cares only about the road insofar as he must travel on these highways to get where he wants to go.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the story designer is like a civil engineer who focuses on how to build roads. His concern starts with where the highway must go long before it even exists, and how it must get there while adhering to the needs of those who will be using it. As the engineer inspects his ongoing work he wonders if the bridges are high enough, or if he placed enough drainage near desert washes, or if the paving material here and there is really suitable for the weather.<br />
<br />
Both our trucker and our engineer are highway experts of a sort, but the expertise needed for driving on the finished roadway is not the same as the expertise needed for its design and construction.<br />
<br />
To write a book is not the same thing as to read a book. To make a movie is not the same thing as to watch a movie. To program a computer game is not the same thing as to play a computer game. As a member of the audience we may be able to distinguish the difference between a good and a bad story, and we may have all sorts of opinions about the plot and character development -- just like the trucker who can distinguish every bump in the road. And in this same way, the first step in learning how to write stories is to realize how the skill of an audience member --at best-- only gives the writer an ear for what might seem right once the story has been created. Yet this experience offers no direct skills to the creative process itself. One could memorize every story in literature, view every movie ever made 20 times over, and play every computer game ever built, and little or nothing would be learned about how to create one of these story telling experiences.<br />
<br />
And with this pompous-sounding-yet-probably-true tirade, I will begin to explain how to design stories from the beginning...<br />
<br />
=DECIDING WHERE TO GO=<br />
<br />
The most important factor in a design, whether a story or anything else, is the goal. The goal might be to create a flashy sports car with lots of performance. Or it might be to build a truck with a practical amount of cargo space. What is the point of a sports car? To draw attention. What is the point of a truck? To haul stuff. What is the point of your story? Whatever premise you wish to prove.<br />
<br />
When I begin to write a story, I forget about settings, plot lines, cute dialog, massive explosions, robots, and engaging characters -- all of that comes later. I focus only on where I want to go with my design, and this decision becomes the principal guide for all subsequent decisions as I begin to build up the story in detail.<br />
<br />
Just as every decision about a sports car design is done with the objective of creating a flashy automobile in the end, and just as every component of a truck is designed so that a practical cargo-hauling vehicle gets built in the factory, the pieces of a story are selected and built with the premise in mind. Anything that is weak or misaligned is replaced or discarded. Anything that is left unconnected is either tied in or tossed out. If I stick to my goal I will make my point with the audience almost as a byproduct of having only included only those elements which support my chosen premise.<br />
<br />
How do you ultimately prove your premise?<br />
<br />
You decide where you want to go and work like mad to drive that point home in every step along the way. In the end, if you stay on-track, there will be little doubt why each step is there and where the whole story is headed.<br />
<br />
=PARAMETERS=<br />
<br />
Starting with your premise, the process of writing a story is one of continuing refinement by defining and working within the constraints of your design parameters.<br />
<br />
Parameters are the accepted limits placed on a design. The written form of these parameters are called design specifications. For a truck it might be cargo capacity, transmission ease-of-use, and "manly" styling. For a sports car, it might be cornering ability or sound system performance. Parameters are not the actual design decisions, but rather the questions you are constantly asking when making those decisions. For example: How fast should the car be able to go? -- rather than saying exactly how much horsepower it needs.<br />
<br />
Here are the five most important design parameter questions to answer when designing a story...<br />
<br />
What do you want to prove?<br />
<br />
Who would you like to see in the story?<br />
<br />
Where would you like it to happen?<br />
<br />
When would you like this story to take place?<br />
<br />
What is the single most obvious way to prove the premise?<br />
<br />
<br />
Here's what I mean...<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=WHAT DO YOU WANT TO PROVE?=<br />
<br />
I've talked a lot about how the audience must be able to find the premise as the story telling experience unfolds.<br />
<br />
But how do we come up with a premise?<br />
<br />
As mentioned in Part 1 of this series, the premise can be any statement of fact -- even things which are not true in the real world. It should also be something that galvanizes the thoughts of the writer -- something that is really annoying or truly interesting. Some of my personal favorites are along the lines of power and how it corrupts normal people.<br />
<br />
Often your favorite premises will be those you have seen before, and this is perfectly fine since just about every idea for a premise has been covered at one time or another. In fact, some authorities will argue that every premise has been written already -- so the trouble to cough up something truly unique may be a wasted effort. Many fine stories have been written based on a fairly ordinary-sounding premise like "good will overcome evil, " or "decency can prevail even in the midst of horror." Just say what you want to say, and don't worry if somebody else has tried to make this point before.<br />
<br />
If the idea of creating a premise seems foreign, you can start to get a feel for this by looking for the premise in the stories you have been experiencing lately. Try to say what the story is trying to prove (not a synopsis of what is happening in the story). A good story will broadcast it over and over in many different ways -- like in movie Men in Black where we are constantly shown how the tabloids are right about everything, including aliens who are really here, and the Earth which is in constant danger of destruction. Often the main character will actually state the premise at some point, like when K describes how the tabloids are "the most reliable reporting on the planet."<br />
<br />
Another way to hear a premise is listening to people who speak passionately on a topic. People like this will often spin their premise into a catch phrase -- like Martin Luther King's famous "I have a dream..." speech, where the point is how he hopes that all of these dreams will soon become a reality.<br />
<br />
Pick something. Try it on for size. Perhaps even start sketching out some ideas for characters and settings. But don't start to write anything concrete until you have written the premise in ink and taped to the side of your computer. Remember -- your premise will be the anchor and reference point for every character, setting, idea, and action in your story. Stay with creating your premise as long as it takes, because once you know what you want to prove you will have a guide and filter for the whole story -- and then you can begin to select what should belong, and discard what does not fit.<br />
<br />
<br />
=WHO IS INVOLVED IN THE STORY?=<br />
<br />
Each main character needs to start with a motto for life -- a central guiding principle (really their own personal premise on life).<br />
<br />
Here are nine types of people to get you started...<br />
<br />
1. The perfectionist -- Being right is most important.<br />
<br />
2. The over-giver -- Making other people happy is most important.<br />
<br />
3. The performer -- Image is everything.<br />
<br />
4. The reclusive artist -- Trust no one.<br />
<br />
5. The inventor -- Trust no one else's ideas.<br />
<br />
6. The servant -- Do what you are told, that will keep you safe.<br />
<br />
7. The fun-lover -- I do what I want, and I am good at what I enjoy.<br />
<br />
8. The bully -- I am the boss.<br />
<br />
9. The accommodator -- I bend to fit in.<br />
<br />
<br />
Characters must have a history -- which means writing a background story about their past which can leak into the "real" story when needed. You design each character to the extent that you know how they dress, who they might vote for, where they might shop, and what rubs them the wrong way. Imagine that you are in a human-engineering shop. You construct your characters in ways that intrigue you -- in ways that make them unique and interesting... verging on the superhuman in some ways perhaps, but never completely beyond plausibility.<br />
<br />
It takes a little practice to create realistic and somewhat larger-than-life characters. But the world is full of building blocks. Many of us have perhaps worked for a tyrant or bumbling boss. Most of us have had mothers and fathers, and we've had the chance to see how other parents interacted with our friends. We all know crazy, quirky, manic, annoying, weird, stupid, and brilliant people in real life -- these are the building blocks for your characters.<br />
<br />
Go to the mall. Go to a black gospel church. Go to where people are and listen in. But don't go to the movies or into other fiction for this purpose -- these are not real people, and you will only succeed --at best-- in making a very imperfect copy of what somebody else has already created. Instead build your own characters from the intriguing pieces of the real people you meet in the real world -- they're out there. Believe me.<br />
<br />
Here's how in detail...<br />
<br />
When you see some character trait or mannerism or catchy way of speaking, make a mental note, then jot down that personality trait as soon as you can. After you have several hundred of these snapshots into people's lives, grab a handful of these notes and read them out loud one after the other -- then ad lib a sketch about some person that might fit these pieces -- who they are, what they do for a living, who they live with, etc. And as you are doing this, dig through the pile to fill in the missing pieces of your ad lib sketch. Sometimes this results in great characters. Sometimes it's a big fun joke that goes nowhere. But keep trying, and keep adding to the note pile. Eventually you will come up with some amazing results.<br />
<br />
<br />
=WHERE WOULD YOU LIKE IT TO HAPPEN?=<br />
<br />
Once the premise is set and you have your main characters sketched out, the next most important decision is the physical setting. Although we have pieced some characters together, we can not effectively pin down who these people are until we have a sense for where the story will take place. A military setting might infer a tendency towards macho behavior, whereas a university setting might steer the characters toward at least a veneer of intellect.<br />
<br />
The premise is one guide for deciding on the setting, and the set of characters you have in mind is the other. If the story is a morality play and your characters seem interested in the dilemmas that arise when hard choices are needed, then perhaps a religious setting might be effective. If it is "the good individual versus the evil empire," perhaps an authoritarian world is best. Keep in mind the idea of the crucible as discussed in Part 1, and try out lots of small settings -- places you have read about in the newspapers, or have traveled to in the past. Don't just say "Africa." Rather, try pinning it down to a tight locality such as "the Orthodox Jewish section of Omaha, Nebraska," or "a fishing village on Kodiak Island, Alaska."<br />
<br />
Once you begin to have an idea for a setting -- go there, or at least go to someplace as similar as possible in order to sniff the air and listen to the sounds. This is the world of your story, and as the writer you will need to be a sort of demigod of the place -- knowing more about it than anyone in the story -- because your characters can only occupy the space that you create for them.<br />
<br />
The details...<br />
<br />
In the same way that you need to keep notes on different types of people, you should also start keeping notes on interesting places. The best settings are often combinations of two or more real places, which give a sense of reality without creating a distraction over whether or not the place is depicted correctly. Also, as with designing your characters, do not copy setting ideas from existing stories. You will only create a second-rate setting, since it would be based on your limited interpretation of somebody else's imagination.<br />
<br />
Make your snapshot notes about real places, drop them on your desk, and rummage around until a picture starts to form -- then write about this place like crazy until you know where everything is -- from the church clock tower that strikes the hours 12 minutes late to the bakery where someone always seems to forget about the smoldering pies in the oven -- thus filling the morning air with the smoke of burning apples.<br />
<br />
<br />
=WHEN WOULD YOU LIKE THIS STORY TO TAKE PLACE?=<br />
<br />
Another refinement in parameters is the decision about when the story will happen. The "when" parameter is the period of time covered, particularly whether this time is in the past, the future, or contemporaneous. "When" also includes the time before the story -- the back story-- and the overall environment as a result. Many apocalyptic settings have a "when" in the near future after humans (or aliens) have screwed up the world as we know it. In this case, the "when" is that time in the fictional future as well as those events which lead up to such a dismal circumstance.<br />
<br />
Deciding when the story will happen is a matter of how far away from the present time period is necessary to allow for the premise to be proven. A story about human passions, or conflict over money, power, romance, etc. can happen very well in the present age, so there is no need for delving into the past or inventing a fictional future. On the other hand, if you are trying to say something about horrendous consequences for mankind, it might be better to select some truly dark time in history, or an even darker time in a terrible future.<br />
<br />
The advantages of a present-day time period include familiarity with the material and less effort diverted into replicating the past or inventing a future. On the other hand, the present day offers few unique settings that have not already been explored thoroughly. Ultimately, when to set the story depends on where the writer's expertise and interests lie. A historian may have no problem creating an ancient setting; a journalist might be comfortable sticking with the present-day; and someone with a technological bent might feel quite comfortable inventing a setting in the future.<br />
<br />
One thing is for certain -- the audience is full of experts on history, current events, and technology. So whatever setting in time you do pick, it is wise to do a lot of research and even bring in a few experts in the area for a reality check. Nothing can spoil a story faster than too many glaring inconsistencies.<br />
<br />
=WHAT IS THE SINGLE MOST OBVIOUS WAY TO PROVE THE PREMISE?=<br />
<br />
This question is really the first tool I use to figure out what happens in the story. Once I have my premise, roughly drawn main characters, and a tentative location, the time has come to sketch out some possible routes for the story. Of course, much more could be written on how to generate the story events than what I say here... yet I have to start someplace, so here we go...<br />
<br />
Remember the temperature curve? (See Part 3.) In the second half of the story, as the protagonist begins to take on his nemesis, he will fail along the way except for the climactic sequence of scenes at the end of the story. This is where I start -- right in the heart of the main conflict.<br />
<br />
Keeping in mind how you are trying to prove the premise, and using your fabricated characters and settings, write 10 to 20 brief scenes or sequences of scenes, each of which are intended to be the big climactic end of the story. Don't worry about whether these are almost the same or vastly different -- the objective now is to get the ball rolling so that you have some material to work with. Most of this will wind up in the trash, so don't go hog-wild with detail. Just write a page or two for each attempt.<br />
<br />
Next, set aside all but the best five or six of these sequences, then rate them in order of strongest to least powerful. After this, place the second strongest of your top five or six sequences at the midpoint of the story (this will be rewritten to be the midpoint crisis), then lay out the rest in ascending order of temperature all the way to the end, placing the very strongest sequence last. Then, at the conclusion of each climatic scene, show how each attempt fails in some way -- how the protagonist gets tripped up or out-maneuvered by the antagonist -- except for the last scene where the protagonist finally wins.<br />
<br />
Of course, you have just made a huge mess, since none of these scenes connect. So now rewrite each of these starting with the one that seems farthest out of place -- change what happens (but not the level of intensity) to better fit the other scenes, and keep rewriting these sequences until they line up fairly well.<br />
<br />
Next, have a look at possible beginnings for the story -- something that puts the characters into an initial bind -- like the way McCoy runs into the time machine, leaving Kirk and the landing party trapped (see Part 3 for more on this). Once you have the protagonist and main supporting characters in the initial bind, write scenes showing them coming to grips with the predicament and struggling to formulate a plan to deal with the antagonist. Let them slowly get a handle all the way up to the midpoint of the story, then bring them face to face with the midpoint crisis -- thereby tying the first half of the story into the second half with its five or six sequences of growing conflicts that you already have roughed out.<br />
<br />
Before you can say you have a rough draft, you will also need to write early scenes to introduce the main characters showing their personal premises and those attributes we will need to believe about them in later scenes. And then lastly, create a prologue sequence which tells the whole story in a nutshell -- but don't bother with an epilogue for now, since you have no idea yet what the loose ends might be.<br />
<br />
Of course, you still have a giant mess, but the framework is there for adding, rewriting, deleting, and polishing everything that needs to be in your story. You may have a horrendous storyline that needs work -- but having it now hanging on the proper framework allows you to get into the details without worrying about whether or not some major structural element is missing.<br />
<br />
It's all there. It just needs a lot of work. But like a bulldozer clearing the land, you have to start somewhere.<br />
<br />
That's where we will pick up next time...</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Plot_Development_(Part_Three)&diff=4143Plot Development (Part Three)2005-06-07T17:17:29Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>INDUCING REALITY<br />
The Holy Grail of Storytelling<br />
<br />
by Ken "frobber" Ramsley<br />
<br />
Part 3<br />
<br />
THE<br />
<br />
TEMPERATURE<br />
<br />
OF THE STORY<br />
<br />
=TAKING THE TEMPERATURE=<br />
<br />
A major element of inducing a sense of reality involves writing the story to match our human hard-wiring for the peaks and valleys of a story -- what I like to describe in terms of its temperature. In order to draw us into an immersion experience, a story must rise and fall according to our expectations.<br />
<br />
The temperature of a story is the mood of the audience in response to events as they are revealed at any given moment. Sometimes the setting, or the music, or even a seemingly inconsequential background scene will engender a mood-altering response -- but this feeling does not come into any sort of sharp focus until the audience sees how the protagonist is reacting. This is because our experience of any story is always through the eyes of the protagonist. When the protagonist feels grimly towards his or her prospects -- we feel equally unsettled. When he searches in vain for the lost sacred object, we feel the same growing sense of panic. And when the hero decides to travel to where no one has gone before, we feel as though it is our quest as well.<br />
<br />
If one were to plot a story's temperature on a chart, where 0 is no feeling and 100 is where your mind is about to blow, we would see how this temperature changes in the audience as the story progresses -- and at the end we would have a record of how the story affected the audience at any given moment -- a pattern of ups and downs that would plot the entire mood history of the story telling experience.<br />
<br />
Some writers chafe at the notion that one particular temperature pattern works better than others. But I must caution you as one who has learned the hard way -- there is a prefered pattern nonetheless. And if the writer attempts to alter this pattern in any significant way, the story will likely induce nothing more than a masse exodus where the audience leaves out of pure frustration. If you want to reach the vast majority of people in a way that does not confuse them or piss them off, like it or not, the temperature at each moment must fit how people are built to process a story ...whether it is told in a book, or inside a computer game, or within a science fiction television series.<br />
<br />
Now for an example...<br />
<br />
=THE CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER=<br />
<br />
First broadcast in 1967, episode 28 in the original Star Trek series entitled The City on the Edge of Forever is perhaps the best written science fiction television show of that decade -- and possibly ever.<br />
<br />
The story begins with the crew of the Enterprise orbiting a planet to investigate strange ripples in time which periodically convulse the ship with each passing wave. During one particularly strong event helmsman Sulu is injured and the doctor (McCoy) is called. A brief injection from McCoy restores Sulu to immediate health and all seems well enough until another time ripple strikes the ship seconds later, causing McCoy to accidentally inject himself with the remainder of the entire hypo. The doctor freaks out from the effects of the drug, fights his way off the bridge, and transports himself to the planet's surface near the source of the time/space disturbance.<br />
<br />
A landing party lead by the captain (Kirk) and his first officer (Spock) transport to the surface in hot pursuit, and when they arrive they discover how this planet is in ruins -- and very old ruins indeed -- perhaps as old as 10,000 centuries by Spock's estimation. While the rest of the landing party searches for McCoy, Spock and Kirk take a moment to inspect the ancient relics, among which is an intriguing annulus -- the singular source of the time/space ripples. Since nearly the beginning of time itself the annulus has awaited this moment to disclose its name and purpose: "I am the Guardian of Forever," it announces, part living being and part machine -- a time portal of sorts, able to transport anyone to any place in history by simply passing through the opening at the proper instant as events flash by.<br />
<br />
While the Guardian shows the Earth's past, McCoy is discovered and briefly subdued until, with their attention diverted, the crazed doctor awakens under the stimulation of the drug, breaks past the startled landing party and leaps into the opening in time beyond the wild diving tackle of Kirk. He missed him! HE MISSED HIM!!<br />
<br />
It will take all of their scientific know-how to unravel this situation -- but there is now no Enterprise orbiting above. In fact, according to the Guardian, all that ever was -- the ship, the Federation of Planets, and even human space travel is totally gone. McCoy has somehow altered the past in a big way.<br />
<br />
In one of the most daring acts of human (or vulcan ) capacity Kirk decides that he and Spock will attempt time travel themselves aided only by Spock's tri-corder instrument to guide their proper point of entry. Kirk issues an order to those left behind that each remaining member of the landing party must themselves do the same should he and Spock fail to return within a reasonable length of time --until either McCoy is found and stopped, or until the entire party becomes forever trapped in the past.<br />
<br />
There is no other choice.<br />
<br />
=THE TEMPERATURE CURVE=<br />
<br />
By sampling the temperature as each event unfolds we begin to see the intensity curve of the story. Initially out of pure anticipation, the audience, or reader, or game-player begins with a temperature of roughly 10 on the scale of 0 to 100. During the prologue and the introduction of the main characters, the story should reach about 30 as anticipations reaches its peak and the initial dilemma or quest is revealed. By the time the characters conclude their splashy entrance about 1/8th of the way into the story, the curve must reach about 50 or else the audience will begin to doubt whether the rest of story has any punch. This is the point in Episode 28 when Kirk and Spock make their jump into the past.<br />
<br />
Having reached this early peak, the story should now begin to cool down as the protagonist adjusts to the new situation and begins to learn more about what lies ahead. And as the main characters see more of their predicament, and while all the clues needed for the conclusion are placed, the temperature will meander down to nearly 0 as the story approaches the midpoint.<br />
<br />
----------<br />
<br />
Kirk and Spock must first find clothes to match their 1930's New York City surroundings. Then they need money so Spock can start to build a memory circuit to help decipher his tri-corder readings (those recorded before McCoy changed time versus those after he screwed things up). They need a place to live. And all along they have to figure out if McCoy is anywhere nearby. They catch a break when their new employer and landlord, a soup mission worker named Edith Keeler, sets them up with a "flop" for two dollars a week and gives Kirk a handy-man job at 15 cents an hour -- hardly enough for food much less the five pounds of platinum Spock would like for his electronics.<br />
<br />
Weeks pass, and progress on Spock's tri-corder memory is painfully tedious. McCoy may arrive any time, and as the days pass Kirk is growing more fond of Edith.<br />
<br />
----------<br />
<br />
By the midpoint of the story the scope and difficulty of the quest has become clear to the protagonist. Little concrete progress has taken place, though, nor has there been any huge crisis yet -- but all of this is about to change.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=THE MIDPOINT=<br />
<br />
At the midpoint of the story, a crisis must be reached in accordance with our human story telling hard wiring -- and at this point, as explicitly as possible, the protagonist must face this question: ARE YOU WILLING TO FACE YOUR GREATEST FEAR? Luke Skywalker learns from Yoda that he must face Darth Vader (The Empire Strikes Back), Jim Lovell must face the truth of how he and his crew may never return to the Earth alive (Apollo 13), and in Episode 28, Kirk must face the prospect of choosing between the future for Edith Keeler and the future for all of humanity.<br />
<br />
The time for action has arrived.<br />
<br />
----------<br />
<br />
From his first experiments Spock learns that Edith is killed in a traffic accident, then minutes later both he and Kirk see the alternate version where she lives at least six years longer. But Spock's electronics burn out before they can learn which is the right path of history -- whether Edith must live or die. Clearly, Edith is the focal point in time, and whatever McCoy does or does not do is the key to the future.<br />
<br />
But what should they do even if they can find McCoy at the proper time? Perhaps McCoy causes Edith's death, and she should live. Or perhaps he saves her, and for the sake of proper events she should have died. Kirk is furious. The memory circuit must be made to work! He has to know the answer. It is unbearable -- for Kirk is falling in love with Edith -- and he can not rest until they have the answer.<br />
<br />
In their desperation for tools, Spock cracks a safe, and when Edith discovers how Kirk and Spock have "borrowed these for the night" she threatens to throw them back onto the street --until she sees how Kirk totally trusts Spock in his honesty, and something about her unique capacity for human understanding allows her to accept Spock's promise to return the tools by morning.<br />
<br />
----------<br />
<br />
At the peak of the midpoint crisis the protagonist must make a decision to resolve the conflict -- no matter the cost. This decision must ultimately lead to a direct engagement with the true enemy, and the hero must now take the first step in this commitment. Like Luke, he must leave his training to face Vader. Like Jim Lovell he must abort the mission to the Moon and instead work to get his crew home alive. Like Kirk, he must risk breaking into the safe to borrow expensive tools. When the moment for action arrives --and it will arrive in any well-told story-- there can be only one acceptable choice. Apollo 13 Flight Director, Gene Kranz, says it best just as the enormity of the crisis dawns on everyone-- "gentlemen, failure is not an option!"<br />
<br />
No story will ever work unless it passes through this sort of midpoint crisis. Without it, the audience never knows if the protagonist is committed -- or just going through the motions. Only when we know for sure that our hero is willing to risk everything do we discover that he or she has a genuine spine, and is therefore worthy of success.<br />
<br />
Now the temperature is beginning to rise again because the story has reached the beginning of the end.<br />
<br />
<br />
=THE BEGINNING OF THE END=<br />
<br />
Beginning with the mid-point crisis until about 7/8ths of the way through the story, the protagonist will attempt to resolve the conflict, and with each passing engagement the hero will get closer to the goal, first peaking the temperature at around 50, and then reaching about 70 during the last attempt in this section of the story.<br />
<br />
Although these early attempts gain ground, they fail to defeat the antagonist in a fitting way -- and as the audience absorbs each new failure, the temperature cools while the protagonist regroups for the next attempt. In this way the action for a time swings up and down from ever rising peaks to ever lower valleys. Finally, at the 7/8th point of the story, the last of these failed engagements leaves the protagonist nearly beaten and devoid of options. He's finished. Doomed. There is no hope in sight.<br />
<br />
The temperature now plummets.<br />
<br />
----------<br />
<br />
In episode 28, Spock finally get's his memory circuit to work again and now the truth becomes clear...<br />
<br />
Edith is a genuinely remarkable woman. In the same way that she is accepting of Spock's borrowed tools, she has the ability to convince powerful people in her own time of a peaceful resolution to conflicts. It is a great gift, yet it has arrived at the wrong time in history. In the near future, according to one possible path for her life, she will build a highly effective peace movement right at the beginning of World War 2 in Europe -- thus delaying American involvement in the war and allowing time for Nazi Germany to build their atomic bomb. Germany wins the war and conquers the world!<br />
<br />
Spock's alternate tri-corder reading shows a different outcome. In a few days hence Edith is killed in a pedestrian accident. Evidently, McCoy prevents this. And so Spock's conclusion is simple -- To prevent the Nazis from winning the war and ruining the whole future as they know it, Edith Keeler must be allowed to die. Kirk, of course, is shredded by the news, and at first he chooses not to believe it at all. He really loves this woman. How can he stand by and actively intervene to ensure that she dies as scheduled?<br />
<br />
Each passing opportunity for an accident now fills Kirk with rising internal conflict. Even he, himself, could now inadvertently save her. But instead --no mater what-- he must allow her to be killed when the time arrives. Time is a cruel master! Time itself is the enemy!! If Edith does not die, then millions of other people will perish in ways that they did not perish before, and all that ever should have happened will be lost in time forever.<br />
<br />
=THE CONCLUSION=<br />
<br />
At the 7/8ths point the temperature of the story should drop toward 0 as we see the protagonist beaten and hopeless. Once again the human story telling hard-wiring expects this. It is the signal that the conclusion is coming, that the next conflict will be the last, that the story will now bring the protagonist and his nemesis together, that this antagonist will be defeated in some fitting way, and the premise proven most convincingly.<br />
<br />
As hope hits rock bottom, some last tidbit, or overlooked resource, or scrap of insignificant information comes to light. Perhaps it was in plain view in the prologue but no one understood its meaning then, or something the antagonist does reveals a hidden weakness, or some "red button" that was once a joke becomes the only way through the blocked tunnel. No matter what it is, the meaning is simple: The protagonist is freed to fight for the victory.<br />
<br />
From this point on the temperature must climb as high as it can go -- all the way up to 100 -- without any more dips along the way. Until the antagonist is defeated in a fitting way and the quest is secured, the temperature must not even level out -- for the die is cast. The final battle is engaged. Win or lose, there is no turning back. And just when the penultimate peak is reached, all is held in the balance, teetering between success and failure, death and victory, salvation and doom.<br />
<br />
Exactly what happens in this last section does not matter nearly as much as how the tension and excitement keeps growing. It can be a major battle scene, or the point where the truth begins to pour out in a courtroom, or where a mountain climber sees the impending storm and must rescue the others before it hits. In some way this is now the mad dash to the end where no one pulls any punches. Luke begins a battle to the death against Vader. The Apollo 13 command module begins to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere on failing batteries. Kirk reaches his moment of truth.<br />
<br />
----------<br />
<br />
The conclusion of Episode 28 turns when Doctor McCoy finally shows up. He is delusional at first, but gradually recovers under the care of Edith who leads him away from a coffee line just seconds before Spock arrives in same the kitchen himself.<br />
<br />
Several days pass while McCoy recovers fully -- until Kirk hears from Edith about her new friend, "Doctor McCoy," while walking with her to the movies. Kirk knows what he must do. He must find McCoy! NOW!! He tells Edith to stay put while he runs across the street to the mission, and there he finds both Spock and McCoy in the doorway.<br />
<br />
In those very moments Edith waves from across the street completely absorbed by Kirk's sudden transformation and the strange sight of McCoy rejoicing at finding a familiar face -- and despite Kirk's warnings she begins to cross the street oblivious to the danger.<br />
<br />
McCoy, Kirk and Spock all see her walking into the path of traffic, but before McCoy can even take one full step Kirk does not miss this time -- he clamps onto the doctor as though he were holding back time itself. Then, in plain view of the time travelers, Edith is struck and killed by a passing delivery van. Time is set right again, but the 100 degree temperature momentarily lingers while the meaning sinks into the eyes of our main characters.<br />
<br />
"I could have saved her!! -- DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOU JUST DID!!!" Screams McCoy.<br />
<br />
Kirk turns against a wall clenching his fist in agony.<br />
<br />
"He knows, doctor." Spock says to the night air. "He knows all too well."<br />
<br />
=THE END=<br />
<br />
As promised, the Guardian immediately returns Kirk, Spock, and McCoy to the future upon their success. All is now corrected. The Enterprise is back in orbit again. The Federation of Planets exists as always. The three travellers were only gone for moments.<br />
<br />
When the story is over -- Stop. Let the temperature drop like a rock, thus leaving the audience with the feeling of the conclusion, and add nothing new which might distort this feeling.<br />
<br />
The story of Edith Keeler ends faster than any other Star Trek episode...<br />
<br />
When the Guardian offers Kirk yet another opportunity to travel through time... using the "h" word for the very first time in American television, Kirk ignores the Guardian altogether and simply says, "Let's get the hell out of here!"</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Plot_Development_(Part_Two)&diff=4142Plot Development (Part Two)2005-06-07T17:15:57Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>INDUCING REALITY<br />
The Holy Grail of Storytelling<br />
<br />
by Ken "frobber" Ramsley<br />
<br />
Part 2<br />
<br />
THE STRUCTURE OF THE STORY<br />
<br />
<br />
All complete stories exhibit two principal aspects: an underlying dramatic structure which contains the story's inherent meaning and a secondary meaning which is created by the manner in which that structure is presented in words and symbols. In practice, neither aspect of story can exist without the other, for a structure which has not been made tangible in some form cannot be communicated.<br />
<br />
<br />
The Art of Storytelling<br />
<br />
Melanie Anne Phillips & Chris Huntley<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
BEGINNING, MIDDLE, AND END<br />
<br />
Aristotle had a lot to say about structure in stories, and in a nutshell it comes down to this: Stories should have a beginning, middle, and end. Of course, what we create in each section, and how these pieces are used to build the story requires a little more development. So, as Aristotle advises, I will start at the beginning...<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=THE PROLOGUE=<br />
<br />
We, the movie audience, or the reader, or the game player have just paid our 10, 20, or 60 bucks -- and now before us lies the unknown. Someone may have already told us about the story, but even still we hardly have more than a passing sense for who these characters are and why this story is about them. The trailers for the movie, the artwork on our book cover, or the details of our CD case are just teasers to pique our interest. And even if someone were to sketch out the whole story for us, we still have yet to experience it for ourselves.<br />
<br />
As a writer, on the other hand, I know my story inside and out, and for a long time one of my big worries was how the audience, or reader, or game player might see through the whole thing -- especially if I dropped too many early clues. But I have since discovered that you can't drop too many clues in the first scene --the prologue-- because the audience has no idea at this point what anything means. The writer could even show the very last scene of the whole story as the prologue (like you see in many trailers), and nobody would know enough to understand that the beans had just been spilled. Rather than keeping the audience in the dark. The very first step in any story is to show exactly what will happen, why it will happen, and who will be in the middle of it.<br />
<br />
But this does not mean that the prologue must say this directly (although it could). For the first scene, the writer usually picks some smaller metaphor which has the same premise, symbolic elements, and resolution as the main events of the story. For example, the introductory scene for Men in Black has the camera following a meandering dragonfly as it wanders through various desert perils only to be squashed on the windshield of a van-load of illegal migrant workers. Perfecto! That is exactly what happens in the rest of movie -- a "bug" alien wanders around metropolitan New York avoiding one peril after another (being hunted by MIB), then winds up squashed in the end. Whether the audience realizes this or not, they just saw the whole movie during this three-minute prologue. Are they upset about this? Of course not -- because they have no idea yet what it means.<br />
<br />
Think about how many stories start with the final climactic scene then work backwards from there using flashbacks? The movie Ghandi starts this way -- with his murder. But rather than spoiling the end, it sets up the whole story. If there is no way to create a convincing metaphor like squashed dragonflies, this is certainly a valid way to start your story -- or any other scene for that matter. Anything can be used for an introduction, so long as it's a short snapshot of what will be happening in the rest of the story.<br />
<br />
Remember: In the beginning, you can not possibly spill the beans.<br />
<br />
=THE SPLASH=<br />
<br />
The next step is stating the premise in no uncertain terms. In Men in Black, as soon as the dragonfly is smashed on the windshield, we are immediately shown how there are aliens on the Earth -- and not just the regular sort that the U.S. government tries to keep south of the border -- but the kind from outer space. Act 1, Scene 2 -- here it is, right in our face, with no dithering around the point: Space aliens really do exist, they live among us, and because size does not matter, they fit right in -- and that is the premise of this story. Or put another way, everything you read in the tabloids is true.<br />
<br />
As this second scene develops, the point is driven home in every way possible. Nothing is wasted. Even the metaphor of migrant "alien" workers comes into play when the van is discovered by the U.S. border patrol. One of the aliens hiding in the van really is an alien, and there is no doubt left about where the movie is headed after this space creature gets smeared all over the desert.<br />
<br />
Is what the tabloids say about aliens true? It is starting to look that way. Of course we haven't seen any tabloids yet, so this particular connection is yet to be made. But the splash has stated the point, and now it is just a matter of filling in the pieces by saying this same thing again in other ways.<br />
<br />
<br />
=NAILING THE MAIN CHARACTERS=<br />
<br />
In the second scene we see K acting really cool in a tense situation. In fact he's about as cool as they come, maybe even a little cooler than he would like to be. Also from this scene we can gather that K's job is to track down aliens who violate the terms of their visas on earth, and based on the performance of his elderly partner we can also understand how K might be looking for someone new to train in this profession.<br />
<br />
Enter James -- soon to be "J." We meet him as a young New York City cop chasing somebody on foot. In fact, the somebody is really fast and able to jump to the roof of a building no less! But James runs him down anyway in the old-fashion human way -- finally cornering what is clearly an alien disguised as a human. Are we convinced that James is an amazing human? Yes. Is he resourceful? Absolutely! Is he funny? That too, especially when he jumps from a bridge into an open-top tour bus with the excuse of how it's "just raining black people in New York!" In less than two minutes we already have a feeling for this guy's inner strength, determination, and total incapacity to give up.<br />
<br />
Next we meet Edgar (and the bug) in no less of a memorable way. The bug's spaceship crash lands into Edgar's pickup truck and when Edgar, shotgun in hand, swaggers out to investigate, the bug steals his skin. Although the bug character could have started then, the real Edgar is almost as annoying and conceited as the bug itself -- so no moment is lost in developing the bug's character.<br />
<br />
In less than twenty minutes, we have a clear picture of K, and J, and the bug, and now the meat of the story can begin.<br />
<br />
<br />
=THE MEAT OF THE STORY=<br />
<br />
This is usually what screenwriters call the beginning of Act 2, and it is almost always the hardest section to write. The writer has stated the premise and created a splashy entrance for the main characters. Now what? The answer is that you do it again, and again, and again -- while bringing the protagonist and antagonist into closer conflict.<br />
<br />
At first, J and K only encounter the small crater made by the bug's spaceship. The spaceship is gone, and so is the bug in its Edgar suit. But evidently, this is no mystery to all the of other aliens on the Earth who are leaving in droves. Something is up -- a major war perhaps. And in this way, once again we hear evidence of the premise --Aliens are on the Earth-- because otherwise none would be leaving now!<br />
<br />
In fact, by leaving Manhattan to reach their various jump points, the aliens violate their visas -- and this finally draws the attention of MIB. The aliens know something that they don't -- the Earth is about to be blown to bits.<br />
<br />
What do the tabloids tell us when we're standing in the supermarket check out line? Don't they often predict how the Earth is about to be blown up by some pissed-off aliens? This point is made again and again in the movie -- especially when the aliens who work for MIB start packing up.<br />
<br />
Finally, after a series of gags along these lines, the premise is laid at the audience's feet in no uncertain terms, when, to the utter amazement of J, K consults a news stand for various tabloid headlines -- "the most authoritative reporting on the planet," he deadpans. That's when I fell out of my chair -- perfecto, again!<br />
<br />
Okay, we've got it -- the tabloids are true. Aliens do exist. The Earth is minutes from doomsday on a regular basis. Even, Silvester Stallone is an alien! But now what?<br />
<br />
As I wrote last time, the story can not end until the protagonist defeats the antagonist in some fitting way. And this happens in Act 3.<br />
<br />
=ACT 3 - THE PAYOFF=<br />
<br />
Throughout Act 2, the protagonist (both K and J) come into increasingly closer contact with the antagonist (the bug). Each time they get closer to stopping him, and each time he gets closer to his own quest of stealing the "galaxy." Finally, the bug grabs the galaxy, takes off in a spaceship disguised as a 1964 Worlds Fair sculpture and is shot out of the sky by K and J.<br />
<br />
Now the finale can take place -- the bug is furious, so much so that he sheds his Edgar suit and for the first time we see the thing for what it is -- a 20-foot tall bug monster (remember size does not matter), and now the fight is on to keep the giant bug from climbing aboard the second of the two spaceship sculptures, thus leaving for good (with K and two blaster weapons in its stomach to boot).<br />
<br />
Here again J shows us his unwillingness to give up. He confronts the 20-foot beast with useless sticks, a lot of mouth, and finally just the right amount of resourcefulness -- confounding the bug long enough for K to retrieve their weapons. If not for the first scene where James chases the amazing alien on foot, we would never have bought this final sequence.<br />
<br />
So how does it end? Most fittingly. The bug gets squashed, just like the dragonfly was squashed in the prologue. In fact, every story should be this clear. We, as the audience, should always know what is coming at the end on some level, because what happens at the end of the prologue should always be what happens at the conclusion of the whole story.<br />
<br />
Is there any doubt that the tabloids are true? No!<br />
<br />
Has the bug been squashed? Yes!<br />
<br />
So the story is over, and now let's get to the credits as fast as we can.<br />
<br />
=EPILOGUE=<br />
<br />
The story is over, but sometimes there are a few loose ends worth tying up. That is the point of an epilogue. Nothing major should happen. Also, it should only tie the most interesting loose ends, since nobody expects everything to be cleaned up. And lastly, it is best to keep it short, or leave it out altogether unless a loose end is crying out for resolution. Audiences don't want to hear anything addressed at this point except their burning questions.<br />
<br />
You may have already noticed that I am using the same story-telling structure in this essay. This section is my own epilogue. Here I will capture some of the loose points that would have been a distraction had I pointed them out in the main body of the text.<br />
<br />
*Use foreshadowing as much as possible, For example, K tells J "never to press the red button unless I tell you to." So it's pretty obvious that at some point K will ask. But if we had not already been told how is was for a very special occasion there would have been no emotional setup and payoff when the time comes to use it.<br />
<br />
*The crucible for this story is combination of the New York City area (aliens are only allowed in this zone since this is the least likely place for them to be noticed), and also how the story is bounded by the Archelien ultimatum to return the galaxy within one galactic week (one hour). So the story can not wander much geographically, and certainly can not go on for very long.<br />
<br />
*Notice the arching. The orderly MIB headquarters gets trashed. The bug transforms from something resembling a human to a 20-foot-tall monster. K finally gets his dream to quit. The pathologist becomes human. Edgar's wife gets her life back. J gradually gets a handle on this alien thing and earns respect from the big boss, Zed. And that damn bug finally gets squashed! Who among the main characters is left unchanged? No one. Even the Earth-like Unisphere sculpture gets flattened! But the real Earth --the one we never knew was in danger-- is saved again just like described in the tabloids. And as far as the planet is concerned, besides a few MIB agents and a few more aliens, nobody ever knows the difference.<br />
<br />
Great story.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Plot_Development_(Part_One)&diff=4141Plot Development (Part One)2005-06-07T17:14:24Z<p>81.182.81.212: I will modify the format of this page. Patience</p>
<hr />
<div>INDUCING REALITY<br />
The Holy Grail of Storytelling<br />
<br />
by Ken "frobber" Ramsley<br />
<br />
Part 1<br />
<br />
SEVEN ELEMENTS OF GOOD STORYTELLING<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I appeal to all computer game project leaders, designers, and writers to consider the issue of the unchecked unsophistication in computer game stories and dialog very seriously and carefully.<br />
<br />
Richard "Zdim" Carlson<br />
gamespy.com September, 2000<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
LEARNING ABOUT STORYTELLING ON LINE<br />
<br />
Much has been said and written about the sorry state of storytelling in computer games, but not much has been done to improve matters until Rich Carlson's recent on-target prescription. Game designers, Carlson argues, should study the art of writing just like anyone else calling themselves a professional storyteller. Read the books on it, he admonishes, take the seminars if possible, and learn from the real pros if you can.<br />
<br />
Yet having worked for dozens of companies through hundreds of development projects over the years, I understand how the study of one's craft can get shoved aside under the pressures to ship real products. Despite the potential value, few professional designers have the time to read the textbooks, attend the seminars, or even study their own successes -- much less anyone else's work.<br />
<br />
But what if the material were posted on-line in bite-sized chunks? Perhaps in five or ten minutes a designer might pick up something worth chewing on -- if it were there!<br />
<br />
So let's get started!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
PEOPLE ARE HARD-WIRED FOR STORIES<br />
<br />
There is one profession that is actually older than the supposedly "oldest profession" -- storytelling. And it is no accident, either. Without storytelling we wouldn't be here today typing on computers and playing games over the internet.<br />
<br />
Early clans of humans first told stories to teach their children -- as we still do today. Which fruit was worth finding? Which mushrooms should be avoided? Where could one discover water in the dry season? All of this was critical for their survival -- and storytelling was the only way to pass this knowledge to the next generation. Those groups of people who could tell and remember stories survived. Those who couldn't died out. More than simple entertainment, the storyteller's ability to induce a near-perfect sense of reality is based upon a powerful survival instinct. It's a hardwired element of who we are.<br />
<br />
For this reason the storytelling experience has become a central part of our human experience and the very reason why we can so easily immerse ourselves in a book or a movie or a video game. Beyond merely watching or hearing the story unfold, we absorb it completely -- diving into it and experiencing the events as though they were happening to us alone and not to somebody else. And being such a personal experience, the lessons of each memorable story become rooted in our thoughts to be recalled along with our own personal history.<br />
<br />
But now for the tough part.<br />
<br />
To quote Garett "kfgecko" Choy regarding what makes or breaks a good computer game: "It's the story, stupid." But even after 100,000 years of storytelling, it's still fairly difficult to create a memorable one. Thankfully, Aristotle devoted a considerable effort to understanding and defining what is required of the storyteller, and his work to this day forms the foundation of every textbook on the subject.<br />
<br />
According to Aristotle, the human hard-wiring appears to contain a number of fixed rules, and only those stories fitting within the boundaries of those rules create the immersion experience. Try as they may, fiction writers, screenwriters, and game developers are all constrained by this wiring.<br />
<br />
What "works" therefore is principally a matter of understanding how people experience stories and what can be done to induce this experience in the audience. A lot is still open for debate. But a lot more has been settled. So here I will begin with seven elements where most professional storytellers agree.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
SEVEN ELEMENTS OF GOOD STORYTELLING<br />
<br />
1. A central premise.<br />
<br />
2. Strong three-dimensional characters who change over time.<br />
<br />
3. A confined space -- often referred to as a crucible.<br />
<br />
4. A protagonist who is on some sort of quest.<br />
<br />
5. An antagonist of some sort bent on stopping the hero.<br />
<br />
6. An arch in everything -- everything is getting better or worse.<br />
<br />
7. And perhaps most important -- Conflict.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=PREMISE=<br />
<br />
A premise is the point of the story, like "Power corrupts," or "Bad people can be turned to good," or "Saving the world is worth the effort," or even things that may not be true in the real world like "Good is the same as evil." By the time the audience reaches the end of the story, they should get this point. In fact, the whole object of everything in the story is to build a case for this point.<br />
<br />
To illustrate this, imagine a story that tries to say that "evil is bad," yet shows evil people getting off without a penalty. This will feel wrong at best, and most likely downright stupid. How would you feel if the Empire won at the end of the original three Star Wars movies? If your point is to say that good triumphs over evil, then damnit, by the end of your story it had better triumph!<br />
<br />
Many stories have more than one part to the premise, for example, "power corrupts, but goodness can redeem the corrupted" -- in fact, this very combination is perhaps what makes the first Star Wars movies so satisfying.<br />
<br />
Characters have their own premises as well -- mainly in the from of what they believe about themselves, even if it's not entirely true. It defines their beliefs, convictions and wants -- all of which can be summed up in one or two statements such as "hard work is important" or "I always tell the truth." If characters violate their premise --for example, a hard-worker who suddenly slacks off for no reason, or a truth-teller who tells a lie-- we feel immediately that something is wrong, since we no longer are able to match their actions with the stories they have been telling us about themselves. (It is usually considered a contrivance if a character is set up one way by the writer, then suddenly abandons this premise in favor of something entirely different -- unless the point is to show how they are self-deceived).<br />
<br />
You can tell that a story has a clean premise when it is easy to say what the story is about in just a few sentences. If you can't do that, then it probably has no central premise at all. And believe me, that is one of the main reasons why many computer games seem so lame when it comes to storytelling. There is no point!<br />
<br />
If a game developer really wants to induce reality into the mind of the player, then the player has to see a point in being inside the game other than "Hey, check out all the new ways you can frag these robots before they frag you!" Pick something you want to say, and then say it in as many ways as you can from the beginning to the end. Unless you make your point, your game will get raked for having no reason for existence.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=CHARACTER=<br />
<br />
After the premise has been nailed down, the story design process moves to developing strong, engaging, and believable characters who we will come to care about, root for, despise, or even hate.<br />
<br />
We first see the story as characters who show up and do things. If we do not care one way or the other about the people in the story, we will certainly fail to care about anything that's happening to them -- or in the case of computer gaming, the player will have no desire to continue the game.<br />
<br />
A lot has been written about the differences among 3D characters, 2D stereotypes, and one-dimensional wallflower extras. All of this has to do with how much a character is developed. Main characters need to be as fully developed as the time and space of the story will allow. A lesser "2D" or "one-scene" character (like a tavern keeper) may only reveal one aspect of themselves --and this is all the audience would expect. The rest float around as a backdrop to keep the place from feeling too empty -- and if they were to say or do anything very noticeable it would simply distract from the story.<br />
<br />
But what is this thing called character development?<br />
<br />
Quite simply, the audience starts out blank and as the story unfolds they learn more about the main characters. And what they learn, and how this begins to induce a sense of the character's personality, is what writers call character development. If done well, the audience quickly comes to understand who these people are, and based on this understanding they will either root for them to succeed, or hope for them to fail.<br />
<br />
The effect of creating a character in the minds of the audience is tricky -- perhaps the hardest part of creative writing -- because the characters can only reveal themselves during the course of events -- that's all we really have to work with -- letting them be quiet, or aggressive, or thoughtful, or stupid, or evil, or whatever -- as events unfold. If characters behave according to their underlying premises then they will reveal themselves properly, and when this happens no one will throw up their hands in disgust saying, "why the hell did he do THAT!"<br />
<br />
Being consistent is only the beginning, though.<br />
<br />
Although the main characters need to be true to themselves, they do not have to be "normal" to be believable. In fact, nobody in the audience wants to see a story about average people. Average people do not change much. Average people do not get in over their heads. Average people are boring and should never be the subject of any story unless they're merely starting out as ordinary people only to grow from that point. When we first meet Luke Skywalker he is a fairly whiny and boring kid. But as his past quickly catches up with him he is forced onto the path of becoming who he was always meant to be -- a Jedi knight. But if he had stayed a whiny kid, we would have hurled and left the theater.<br />
<br />
One of the classic problems of a writer is how to reveal these extraordinary characters. We want in the worst way to have them stand up and tell the world about themselves -- but some of the most terrible writing on the planet is the self-revealing monologs peppering Sci-Fi movies and games. It simply violates a basic rule of human hardwiring for someone to launch their guts for no reason. No character in fiction --worth respecting-- publicly reveals their innermost thoughts unless they are compelled by extreme circumstances.<br />
<br />
For characters to become truly believable in the minds of the audience, they must speak mostly through their actions. Princess Leah could have spewed forever over her love for Han Solo -- but when she stuck her neck out to rescue him at the beginning of Return of the Jedi only then could we be sure it was true.<br />
<br />
Tons more could said here, but for now I'll leave you with this to chew on...<br />
<br />
*Dialog is no substitute for action. For the most part characters can only get away with saying what we already could have figured out from what they do. People experiencing a story don't want to find out anything new by simply hearing the characters tell us out of the blue.<br />
<br />
*The main characters should be larger than life in some way -- but still within the possibilities for humans (even if the story is about and ogre, a donkey, and a squirrel). Something about who they are or what they do must stand out as being unique or extraordinary. The audience must see them as distinct and unforgettable.<br />
<br />
*The main characters should barely have the strength to take on their quest at any given point. Characters who are too strong never can convince the audience that they are up against any real challenge. And this goes for both the main hero and the chief "bad guy."<br />
<br />
*Characters that don't change are boring. Also, characters that get stronger for no good reason are not believable. Characters should only grow as a result of having survived a peril or suffered some sort of loss. Nobody changes in a significant way except through extreme experiences.<br />
<br />
*Characters must have a life story (or back story) that gives some sense for their origins. Who they are comes into focus best when we have some sense for their past. Also, events in the past often can be used to justify how a character might exhibit certain behavior in the present -- especially extremely evil behavior.<br />
<br />
*Characters should have some weakness or ghosts from the past which threatens to derail them on their quest. Even the lamest, overblown, and completely unbelievable hero of all time --Superman-- has his problems with Kryptonite.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=CRUCIBLE=<br />
<br />
The premise answers the question of what the story is all about. The crucible answers the question of why it is happening with these particular characters.<br />
<br />
For a story to have a chance at making a point, it has to eliminate all extraneous details, focus on one overall setting and on one group of characters who have a good reason for being there.<br />
<br />
It is very difficult to induce a believable feeling of reality if the wrong people show up, or if the setting is out of place. Why is the story happening here? Why are these characters here? Why do they stay? And what is so special about this time, this place, and the events that seem to be happening?<br />
<br />
If one wishes to melt metal, the heat must be concentrated. And in the same way, a story can only heat up if the events are contained within boundaries of some sort. A story that wanders around, or unfolds into a set of unrelated circumstances, will confuse the audience with useless details.<br />
<br />
Imagine if the Stars Wars movies included hours of documentary footage on the aliens living on all the planets in the area of the action. Perhaps it could be argued that this would be good background information. But it never works. There is no time for it. And worse, the audience can no longer easily tell what is important from what is mere drivel -- if they haven't already passed out in their seats from utter boredom.<br />
<br />
Good stories can be confined by many things such as a time period, or life on a ship, or the workings of a small clique of people organized for a purpose. Islands and small towns work well, too. Epic stories happen to a lot of people in many interrelated settings. Simple stories happen to fewer people and usually in just one place.<br />
<br />
The size of the crucible is not as important as how there must actually be a crucible. At its time of production, Heaven's Gate was the most expensive fiasco in Hollywood history because of how the movie was nothing more than an assemblage of disconnected settings and events. At the other extreme, Apollo 13 had a nearly claustrophobic setting for much of the movie, and it worked well because it confined the vast danger of space travel into a volume far smaller than my office -- an inescapable world unto itself and the central focus of everyone's desire to get these astronauts home alive.<br />
<br />
<br />
=PROTAGONIST=<br />
<br />
The role of the protagonist is to carry the audience through the story -- which is why this is the most important character. The protagonist sees more clearly, understands sooner, makes the good guesses more often, and takes the right path when everyone else says he's crazy.<br />
<br />
Traditionally, this is the main "good guy" character -- but not always "good" in a conventional way. In fact, we may not even find him to be very likable at all, such as Harrison Ford's character in Blade Runner who is dark and brooding while on the case, but we root for him anyway because if nothing else he is the most likable person in the film -- given the other characters.<br />
<br />
Sometimes the protagonist is astounding by simply doing what is sensible in the face of evil -- despite the risks. In Schindler's List, for example, the factory owner is hardly a saint, but compared to the Nazis, he is someone worth caring about given how he has chosen to resist them.<br />
<br />
The most believable protagonists always have problems and flaws that gnaw at them constantly. The battle for them is as much against the demons within as any hurdles in the outside world. And as the hero struggles forward against the demons from both directions, it somehow gives eyes to the audience through the magic of our human storytelling hardwiring While the main character pushes ahead in the quest, the audience experiences the same relief and satisfaction as though they were their own quest.<br />
<br />
Here are some things to consider when creating your protagonist...<br />
<br />
*The protagonist most wants the object of the quest, has the best reason for wanting this goal, and is the one most often willing to work the hardest to get it.<br />
<br />
*The protagonist starts out mostly ignorant of what lies ahead, and must learn and grow in order to survive long enough to get to the end of the quest.<br />
<br />
*The protagonist can not be passive, nor can this character whine too much or seem too wimpy -- at least not for very long. The audience will only root for a potential winner willing to work for it, and someone who wins by accident, or while not giving a hoot, will still be viewed as a loser.<br />
<br />
*Sometimes the "protagonist" is a group of like-minded people all working for a common goal. But usually, it is much easier to set things up with one main hero and a strong supporting cast, rather than confuse the audience with having to follow and root for more than one lead character.<br />
<br />
*The protagonists is best understood as simply the main person we want to see win rather than "good" in any absolute sense.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=ANTAGONIST=<br />
<br />
The main role of the antagonist is to stand in the way of the hero. The story can not end until the protagonist defeats this guy or what he represents in some fitting way. Unfortunately, this character is often under-created, and so the desire to see him or her fail is poorly induced. Worse are the antagonists who are not even human -- like a computer or alien being showing no human characteristics. Can fully non-human "bad guys" give us a believable reason for why they would want to defeat the hero? Not usually.<br />
<br />
But this is not to say that the antagonists has to look human. It can be a computer programmed with a replication of human personality. It can be a god who is half human. It can be a dark force with human characteristics taken from the mind of a very evil human. So long as the antagonist has human evil, or human pride, or corrupted ego, or the need for power, then the hero is up against something the audience can understand. Otherwise there is no way to figure out why the antagonist would want to stop the hero.<br />
<br />
Just as the protagonist has the biggest reason to succeed in the quest, the antagonist has the biggest reason to prevent this success. And it can't just be that he is a bad person. It has to upset his plans for conquest. It has to prevent him from fulfilling his lifelong goals. It has to piss him off way down deep where it hurts the most. Darth Vader took it very personally when Luke Skywalker stood in his way because he had big plans.<br />
<br />
Both the protagonist and antagonist must desperately wish to succeed, and their will to succeed --and even their abilities to do so-- must be very closely matched. If the antagonist is too strong --and loses anyway-- then the hero's success is absurd. And if the antagonist is too weak, we have no need to root for the hero.<br />
<br />
As hard as it may feel, the writer must put as much effort into designing a formidable and believable antagonist as creating a capable and realistic hero.<br />
<br />
Here are some things to chew on when creating your antagonist...<br />
<br />
*The antagonist has a reason for being who he or she is. Bad, evil, and corrupted people are usually made, not just born. The antagonist will be far more convincing if there is a good reason for why they have become this person.<br />
<br />
*What the hero wants must be the opposite of what the antagonist wants, and must stand in the way of the antagonist just as much as how the antagonist stands in the way of the hero.<br />
<br />
*The antagonist should have a soft spot or "human" side -- a sort of weakness for being good in some way. He can not be entirely evil and still be believable.<br />
<br />
*The antagonist must grow in the same way as the hero -- through adversity and struggle. An antagonist can not grow stronger for no good reason.<br />
<br />
*Sometimes the antagonist is merely a powerful concept or idea, rather than an expressed character. But even still, it must have human qualities of some sort, and in some way seem to exist almost purely to stand in the way of the hero.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=ARCHES=<br />
<br />
For a story to feel satisfying to the audience, everything and everyone must change from "pole to pole" -- as they say in the biz. If the protagonist starts out clean-cut and snooty, then he must end up grubby and humble. If he starts as a drunk, then he must end the story sober. If he is angry in the beginning, he must wind up a Mr. Nice Guy. If he is physically strong at first, then in the end he must be beaten up and hardly able to walk.<br />
<br />
Nothing tells a story more clearly than change. Not a single element should be allowed to stay the same as the story develops. The weather must get colder or rainier or darker. The sound must get louder or softer or more sinister. The phases of moon must change. The snow gets deeper. The plans of the antagonist must become more evil. The protagonist must face ever harder challenges.<br />
<br />
This change from one extreme to the other is often called "the arch" of the story. It is the shape of a continuous line drawn from the North pole to the South pole. In ET, for example, Stephen Speilberg uses flowers to convey the failing health of the alien. In Apollo 13, the Earth keeps getting bigger as time is running out. In Gone with the Wind, the mansions of the South fall into disrepair, and with all the slaves gone, the plantation owners themselves have to plant their own vegetables. The weak-minded get smarter. The wise get stupid. The unlucky catch a break. And the hidden evil is brought to justice.<br />
<br />
Nothing stays the same.<br />
<br />
<br />
=CONFLICT=<br />
<br />
There is no satisfaction in a story where someone says what is on their mind for no reason at all. But during an argument or a fight people will say just about anything -- including huge lies, the naked truth, and a whole lot of other things they might not like other people to think about or remember. If you need to have a character say something important, first make sure that he or she is angry or upset in some way. That is when characters let things slip out in the most believable way.<br />
<br />
Overall, people should not get along very well in stories. Conflict and tension increase suspense since we have no idea how these people will behave with each other in the next moment. In the Perfect Storm, two fishermen are at each other's throats for most of the voyage. But when one of these guys gets snagged overboard on a long line, his nemesis is first into the water to save him. These two longliners may have hated each other, but when push comes to shove we learn how true Gloucestermen will do anything to save each other's lives at sea.<br />
<br />
Use conflict to give your characters a good reason to say something important, and also use it to create opportunities for characters to transcend our expectations of them. If you want to induce a powerful sense of reality, then give your characters a chance to prove themselves in a tough situation.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Plot_Development&diff=4140Plot Development2005-06-07T17:10:45Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Plot Development==<br />
<br />
Inducing Reality: [[Part One]]<br />
<br />
Inducing Reality: [[Part Two]]<br />
<br />
Inducing Reality: [[Part Three]]<br />
<br />
Inducing Reality: [[Part Four]]<br />
<br />
Inducing Reality: [[Part Five]]<br />
<br />
Inducing Reality: [[Part Six]]<br />
<br />
Inducing Reality: [[Part Seven]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_design&diff=35Mission design2005-06-07T17:09:38Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div><br>[[FRED Tips]]<br />
<br>[[References]]<br />
<br>[[Backgrounds]]<br />
<br>[[Plot Development]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Backgrounds&diff=737Backgrounds2005-06-07T17:08:56Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Backgrounds==<br />
Backgrounds are extremely important when designing a mission. In addition to breaking up the constant blackness of space, backgrounds set the mood for the mission. If you are creating a standalone (non-campaign) mission, you can use whatever colors you like, regardless the colors don't clash. If the mission takes place in a system featured in the single-player campaign, it is ok to base your nebula backgrounds based on that particular mission.<br />
<br />
If you are creating a campaign, be sure to create templates before starting work on ANY missions. It would also be a good idea to write down the number of planets, the bitmap associated with them along with their orbit. This will come in handy if you have a mission taking place closer to the star, and therefore the closer planets will be larger or only be seen. Make each system unique to give the player more than just the same color backgrounds over different systems. Some ways to vary systems include different numbers, colors and sizes for suns; different nebula patterns and planet systems.<br />
<br />
Whatever you do, make sure to create your backgrounds first so you won't have to worry about getting killed while admiring your nebular handiwork.<br />
<br />
There are three main ways to create backrounds for missions you create in FRED:<br />
<br />
=Creating backgrounds from scratch=<br />
Wether you are using flashy custom nebulas or the stock nebulas, placing nebulas is rather hit-or-miss. For each background bitmap, you must line up the nebulas using the pitch/heading/bank edit boxes. After each significant change, you must test the mission to make sure your tweaks have worked to your desire. You must also make sure each nebula bitmap isn't too streched to make it distorted. Keeping the bitmap's scale values nearly equal will avoid this. Additionally, bitmaps that have really large scales look too streched even when the scale values are nearly square. As with any other topic in FRED, you will get good at this once you have experience.<br />
<br />
=Using a background generation program=<br />
A few background generation programs can be downloaded that will randomly place background bitmaps for you. After running the program, it would spit out a mission file that contains the background. Some tweaks are necessary to get a realistic background, since you may need to change the background's bitmp, pitch, bank and/or heading. This method is much faster than creating backgrounds from scratch. Documentation for each generator varies and it would be a good idea to read it before using.<br />
<br />
=Skyboxes=<br />
A recent addition to the Source code project, skyboxes allow users to create a skybox model and place it around the field of play much like the background bitmaps. They are rendered in addition to the background nebulas, so be sure to include either a skybox or nebula bitmaps, but not both. To create a skybox, read the [Skybox Option] page.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_design&diff=33Mission design2005-06-07T17:08:14Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div><br>[[FRED Tips]]<br />
<br>[[References]]<br />
<br>[[Backgrounds]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=References&diff=112References2005-06-07T17:07:33Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==References for Freespace2==<br />
<br />
*[http://http://home.iprimus.com.au/nexus387/fred2/reference/ships.htm Ships]<br><br />
*[http://home.iprimus.com.au/nexus387/fred2/reference/weapons.htm Weapons]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_design&diff=32Mission design2005-06-07T17:06:21Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div><br>[[FRED Tips]]<br />
<br>[[References]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Capture_Missions&diff=2814Capture Missions2005-06-07T17:04:55Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Capture Missions==<br />
<br />
Capture missions are probably the hardest and most nerve-consuming to make and test. Bear the following suggestions in mind: <br><br />
*Given the fact the AI in FreeSpace 2 is not smart enough to take the goals into consideration, they tend to attack and eventually destroy the ship you will have to capture. To block this, use the change-iff SEXP and change the ship to friendly after it is disarmed and disabled.<br />
*Not putting the capture party's transport into the escort list might suggest two facts: <br><br />
You did not place it into the escort list because it does not come under attack during the mission <br><br />
You neglected your mission <br><br />
So, in a word, use the Escort list <br><br />
*Order the player to destroy the Communication subsystem. Otherwise, using the intact communication systems, the enemy can call in for reinforcements. If the player fails to disable the communications in time, have some more enemy forces arrive. If you are evil enough, you will send in a force that is impossible to beat, making the disablement of the communication system obligatory.<br />
*Make the capture transport send messages often, keeping the pilots updated about the status of the capture operation.<br />
*If you think it is a good idea, you can make the capture party fail and send in a new transport or order the pilots to leave, considering the mission a failure.<br />
*If you have used the change-iff to make the capturable ship friendly, do not forget that the enemy also considers it friendly. Therefore, they do not intend to destroy it until they see it is easier to destroy than to defend it.<br />
*The above hint should also work in reverse: If the friendly team considers the mission a failure, they should attempt to destroy that vessel. Do this if the capture transport is destroyed.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Capture_Missions&diff=30Capture Missions2005-06-07T17:04:34Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Capture Missions==<br />
<br />
Capture missions are probably the hardest and most nerve-consuming to make and test. Bear the following suggestions in mind: <br><br />
*Given the fact the AI in FreeSpace 2 is not smart enough to take the goals into consideration, they tend to attack and eventually destroy the ship you will have to capture. To block this, use the change-iff SEXP and change the ship to friendly after it is disarmed and disabled.<br />
*Not putting the capture party's transport into the escort list might suggest two facts: <br><br />
*You did not place it into the escort list because it does not come under attack during the mission <br><br />
*You neglected your mission <br><br />
So, in a word, use the Escort list <br><br />
*Order the player to destroy the Communication subsystem. Otherwise, using the intact communication systems, the enemy can call in for reinforcements. If the player fails to disable the communications in time, have some more enemy forces arrive. If you are evil enough, you will send in a force that is impossible to beat, making the disablement of the communication system obligatory.<br />
*Make the capture transport send messages often, keeping the pilots updated about the status of the capture operation.<br />
*If you think it is a good idea, you can make the capture party fail and send in a new transport or order the pilots to leave, considering the mission a failure.<br />
*If you have used the change-iff to make the capturable ship friendly, do not forget that the enemy also considers it friendly. Therefore, they do not intend to destroy it until they see it is easier to destroy than to defend it.<br />
*The above hint should also work in reverse: If the friendly team considers the mission a failure, they should attempt to destroy that vessel. Do this if the capture transport is destroyed.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Strike_Missions&diff=2826Strike Missions2005-06-07T17:03:46Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Strike Missions==<br />
<br />
Here are some hints to follow while making Strike missions:<br />
<br />
*Do not forget to put in the ship(s) you have to destroy into the Escort List <br><br />
*Strike missions should involve a lot of friendly forces as well as hostile ones. Four fighters in Alpha wing facing a hostile cruiser and eight other fighters is hardly considered to be a strike mission<br><br />
*If you want the player to attack an installation, encircle it with sentry guns, unless you have a reason why there should not be any.<br><br />
*Balancing the rank rate between friendlies and hostiles is very important. Strike missions cannot be as tactical as [Escort Missions], the more powerful force domintes and wins<br><br />
*If you can afford, have a single wing of patrol fighters and launch the other wings later. The enemy is not able to respond to a fast and unexpected attack by launching a dozen of fighters after 20 seconds. Unfortunately, mission balance sometimes demands hostile fighers being launched as soon as possible. Try to compensate by placing sentry guns, cruisers or perhaps a corvette<br><br />
*If you can, give the player fighters of both fighter and bomber classes to let him choose which role he prefers. This also demands you to test the mission more intensively, but giving the player a choice like that can only make you good<br><br />
*The 'defensive team' must do everything to win the battle. Have some bombers deployed also, even if there are no hostile cruisers present. There are three reasons why: <br><br />
The attackers may deploy any cruisers, corvettes or warships at any time <br><br />
Bombers can still face heavy attack fighters and even destroy some of them with their Harpoons or Tornadoes.<br />
They can unexpectidly attack and surprise the attackers' bombers with their Trebuchets.<br />
<br />
Lastly, but most importantly:<br />
<br />
<b>Thou shalt not make a [[Battle of Endor-scheme]] mission.</b></div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Strike_Missions&diff=29Strike Missions2005-06-07T17:03:26Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Strike Missions==<br />
<br />
Here are some hints to follow while making Strike missions:<br />
<br />
*Do not forget to put in the ship(s) you have to destroy into the Escort List <br><br />
*Strike missions should involve a lot of friendly forces as well as hostile ones. Four fighters in Alpha wing facing a hostile cruiser and eight other fighters is hardly considered to be a strike mission<br><br />
*If you want the player to attack an installation, encircle it with sentry guns, unless you have a reason why there should not be any.<br><br />
*Balancing the rank rate between friendlies and hostiles is very important. Strike missions cannot be as tactical as [Escort Missions], the more powerful force domintes and wins<br><br />
*If you can afford, have a single wing of patrol fighters and launch the other wings later. The enemy is not able to respond to a fast and unexpected attack by launching a dozen of fighters after 20 seconds. Unfortunately, mission balance sometimes demands hostile fighers being launched as soon as possible. Try to compensate by placing sentry guns, cruisers or perhaps a corvette<br><br />
*If you can, give the player fighters of both fighter and bomber classes to let him choose which role he prefers. This also demands you to test the mission more intensively, but giving the player a choice like that can only make you good<br><br />
*The 'defensive team' must do everything to win the battle. Have some bombers deployed also, even if there are no hostile cruisers present. There are three reasons why: <br><br />
The attackers may deploy any cruisers, corvettes or warships at any time <br><br />
Bombers can still face heavy attack fighters and even destroy some of them with their Harpoons or Tornadoes.<br />
*They can unexpectidly attack and surprise the attackers' bombers with their Trebuchets.<br />
<br />
Lastly, but most importantly:<br />
<br />
<b>Thou shalt not make a [[Battle of Endor-scheme]] mission.</b></div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Escort_Missions&diff=2818Escort Missions2005-06-07T17:01:04Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>=Escort missions=<br />
<br />
Here are some hints for making escort missions: <br><br />
*List the ships you need to protect in the Escort list. Set the priority level in accordance with the importance of the ship. This is obvious for most of you, but it is worth mentioning anyway <br><br />
*Use the Near Ship possibility at arrival conditions. It makes the position of all attacking waves unpredictable <br><br />
*Highly random delay between waves. Makes hostile attacks even more unpredictable <br><br />
*The good-secondary-time SEXP. The AI tends to use heavy bombs and ignore their Trebuchets. Use the good-secondary-time SEXP to order the ships to use their Trebuchets when they are out of the range of heavy bombs. <br><br />
*Careful mission balance. Pay special attention to make the mission bearable and beatable. <br><br />
*The fighter wings who defend the strike team should be powerful. Otherwise, your wingen will take them down without a problem. Force the player to attack the fighter escorts. This gives time to the bombers. If the player disobeys, sooner or later all his wingmen will die. <br><br />
*Reinforcements. If you think your mission might become too difficult, it is a good idea to make reinforcements available. <br><br />
*Moving ships. The ships you will have to escort must be moving. Of course, it can be an exception if your mission is to defend a repairing party.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Escort_Missions&diff=28Escort Missions2005-06-07T17:00:28Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>=Escort missions=<br />
<br />
Here are some hints for making escort missions: <br><br />
*List the ships you need to protect in the Escort list. Set the priority level in accordance with the importance of the ship. <br><br />
This is obvious for most of you, but it is worth mentioning anyway<br />
*Use the Near Ship possibility at arrival conditions. It makes the position of all attacking waves unpredictable <br><br />
*Highly random delay between waves. Makes hostile attacks even more unpredictable <br><br />
*The good-secondary-time SEXP. The AI tends to use heavy bombs and ignore their Trebuchets. Use the good-secondary-time SEXP to order the ships to use their Trebuchets when they are out of the range of heavy bombs. <br><br />
*Careful mission balance. Pay special attention to make the mission bearable and beatable. <br><br />
*The fighter wings who defend the strike team should be powerful. Otherwise, your wingen will take them down without a problem. Force the player to attack the fighter escorts. This gives time to the bombers. If the player disobeys, sooner or later all his wingmen will die. <br><br />
*Reinforcements. If you think your mission might become too difficult, it is a good idea to make reinforcements available. <br><br />
*Moving ships. The ships you will have to escort must be moving. Of course, it can be an exception if your mission is to defend a repairing party.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Testing&diff=2828Testing2005-06-07T16:59:06Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Guide to Testing for mission designers==<br />
<b>Keywords:</b> Patience, Time, Circumspection, Purposefulness<br />
<br />
*Never be afraid of testing. Always be straightforward and logical: If you think that part is buggy and you are afraid that you discover that you did something wrong, other people, who played that mission will warn you and that's most inconvenient.<br><br />
*Do not be afraid of time: the more time you spend to look after your mission the better it will become, the more ideas you will get how to make it better.<br><br />
*Never, never, never get annoyed by a bug you can fix. If a debriefing shows up at a bad time every time you test your mission, keep cool. Open up the debriefing window, look at the SEXP tree and think slowly, logically and first of all, calmly. The more time you spend with a bug the more chance you have to fix it. If you manage to fix a problem that you had been fighting with for hours, you will feel more deliberated.<br><br />
*Never be satisfied: Always want to add new things. If needed, sit ten, twenty or even thirty minutes looking onto the boring grid of FRED while thinking into the possible ways of adding new items. Look into the Events window and zoom in/out at the ships and an idea will soon come what to add.<br><br />
*If testing makes you sick, consult your General Practician<br><br />
*Use the Designer's notes! Note down bugs you do not want to fix in the moment you discovered it, note down anything you will want to add. Keep erasing your notes as soon as they become obsolete. Do not let others see your mission until there are any notes left. This window can also be used to communicate with other mission designers, if not only you have been assigned to that mission.<br><br />
*Concentrate on fixing only one bug: Do not try to fix multiple bugs unless you are sure it won't need any testing after you have fixed it(typing mistakes, no ships in escort list, etc).<br><br />
*Never release a mission without testing its last version twice or three times. A seemingly minor change like changing wing delays can result in unexpected difficulties.<br />
<br />
=See also=<br />
[[General hints]] <br><br />
[[Typical mistakes]] <br><br />
[[Tips for mission balancing]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_design&diff=31Mission design2005-06-07T16:56:50Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div><br>[[FRED Tips]]<br />
<br>[[FRED Basics]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_design&diff=27Mission design2005-06-07T16:56:35Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>=Welcome to the Mission design part of the FreeSpace Wikipedia=<br> <br><br />
<br>[[FRED Tips]]<br />
<br>[[FRED Basics]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_design&diff=26Mission design2005-06-07T16:56:18Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Welcome to the Mission design part of the FreeSpace Wikipedia==<br> <br><br />
<br>[[FRED Tips]]<br />
<br>[[FRED Basics]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Enemy_wing_names&diff=2817Enemy wing names2005-06-07T16:55:33Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Enemy wing names==<br />
<br />
=FreeSpace: The Great War=<br />
Volition used Indian culture gods to designate Shivan fighter wings and Zodiac signs to designate hostile Vasudan wings. <br><br />
*<u>Brahma</u><br />
*<u>Vishnu</u><br />
*Shiva<br />
*Saraswati<br />
*Lakshmi<br />
*Parvati<br />
*<u>Durga</u><br />
*Venkateshwara<br />
*Satyanarayana<br />
*<u>Rama</u><br />
*<u>Krishna</u><br />
*Gauri<br />
*Karikeya<br />
*Gayatri<br />
*Ganesh<br />
*Hanuman<br />
*Dyaus<br />
*Varuna<br />
*<u>Indra</u><br />
*Surya<br />
*Savitar<br />
*Soma<br />
*Agni<br />
*Vayu<br />
*Ushas<br />
*<u>Arjuna</u><br />
<br />
<u>Underlined</u> wing names were used in the Main FreeSpace Campaign. The other wing names are hints for mission designers.<br />
<br />
=Freespace 2=<br />
Volition used only Zodiac signs to designate hostile fighter wings.<br />
<br />
*Aquarius <br><br />
*Aries <br><br />
*Cancer <br><br />
*Capricorn <br><br />
*Gemini <br><br />
*Leo <br><br />
*Libra <br><br />
*Pisces <br><br />
*Sagittarius <br><br />
*Scorpio <br><br />
*Taurus <br><br />
*Virgo<br />
<br />
A mission designer need not follow this naming system, although this system is very common among mission designers.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Enemy_wing_names&diff=24Enemy wing names2005-06-07T16:54:33Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Enemy wing names==<br />
<br />
=FreeSpace: The Great War=<br />
Volition used Indian culture gods to designate Shivan fighter wings and Zodiac signs to designate hostile Vasudan wings. <br><br />
<u>*Brahma</u><br />
<u>*Vishnu</u><br />
*Shiva<br />
*Saraswati<br />
*Lakshmi<br />
*Parvati<br />
<u>*Durga</u><br />
*Venkateshwara<br />
*Satyanarayana<br />
<u>*Rama</u><br />
<u>*Krishna</u><br />
*Gauri<br />
*Karikeya<br />
*Gayatri<br />
*Ganesh<br />
*Hanuman<br />
*Dyaus<br />
*Varuna<br />
<u>*Indra</u><br />
*Surya<br />
*Savitar<br />
*Soma<br />
*Agni<br />
*Vayu<br />
*Ushas<br />
<u>*Arjuna</u><br />
<br />
<u>Underlined</u> wing names were used in the Main FreeSpace Campaign. The other wing names are hints for mission designers.<br />
<br />
=Freespace 2=<br />
Volition used only Zodiac signs to designate hostile fighter wings.<br />
<br />
*Aquarius <br><br />
*Aries <br><br />
*Cancer <br><br />
*Capricorn <br><br />
*Gemini <br><br />
*Leo <br><br />
*Libra <br><br />
*Pisces <br><br />
*Sagittarius <br><br />
*Scorpio <br><br />
*Taurus <br><br />
*Virgo<br />
<br />
A mission designer need not follow this naming system, although this system is very common among mission designers.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Beating_the_briefing_icon_bug_of_FRED_Open&diff=2829Beating the briefing icon bug of FRED Open2005-06-07T16:50:34Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Beating the briefing icon bug of FRED_Open==<br />
<br />
Newest FRED_Open versions have a bug which prevents people from making briefing icons appear on the briefing screen. Some people get discouraged by this bug when making briefing icons, but it is not hard to work around it. This is one poossible method of avoiding difficulties:<br />
Zoom out until all the ships you want the briefing to display are on the screen. Enter the briefing editor (SHIFT-B), then double-click on the briefing screen to enlarge the display. Switch to select mode instead of move mode by clicking on the cursor icon on the main FRED toolbox (the very first icon). Switching to Select tool will prevent you from moving ships away unintentionally since you will have to use the rectangle selection method. Select the ship you want to have displayed as an icon and switch to the briefing editor. Click on Make Icon. That will make the icon itself, which you cannot see due to the bug in question. Click anywhere on the briefing display, preferably not on any ship or in the vicinity of the icon you have just made. That will deselect the icon, but you will have to select the icon again so you could move it: Using the rectangle selection method in the briefing display is to be used again. It will only select the _icon_ itself, not the ship. You can move or edit its properties at your discretion. To move it, switch to Move mode and press the spacebar. Tap the left button of your mouse and move the cursor to the position you want to move the icon. You will notice a 'Briefing icon' text which will help you find your way around where your icons are placed.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Variables&diff=2830Variables2005-06-07T16:50:20Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div></div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Moving_convoys_with_one_waypoint&diff=2815Moving convoys with one waypoint2005-06-07T16:49:21Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Hints relating to convoys==<br />
<br />
Normally, you think it would take as many waypoints as many ships you have in the convoy to make them move. You Are Wrong. There is a much simpler way. Use only one waypoint for all ships if you only want the convoy to move straight ahead and then jump out after a given amount of time. Just put the waypoint far, far away and make all the ships face and move towards it. If you have placed the waypoint far enough, you will get a high number of time needed to reach the destination for the convoy. The ships need not reach the waypoint, obviously, use Events or Departure Cue to order all the ships to leave.<br />
----<br />
If possible, avoid refering to Wing names in the has-departed-delay SEXP. If all ships in a wing leave individually, it will not make FS2 notice that the whole wing has departed. Instead, list all the ships one by one or use the percent-ship-departed SEXP. <br><br />
Should you intend to use Wing names in the has-departed-delay, make sure that in the Wing Editor, the Departure Cue becomes true before all the ships jump out. Logically, if you do not find it important that each ship leaves a different time, you might use the Departure Cue to order the whole wing of ships to depart at the same time.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Variables&diff=23Variables2005-06-07T16:48:40Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Beating the briefing icon bug of FRED_Open==<br />
<br />
Newest FRED_Open versions have a bug which prevents people from making briefing icons appear on the briefing screen. Some people get discouraged by this bug when making briefing icons, but it is not hard to work around it. This is one poossible method of avoiding difficulties:<br />
Zoom out until all the ships you want the briefing to display are on the screen. Enter the briefing editor (SHIFT-B), then double-click on the briefing screen to enlarge the display. Switch to select mode instead of move mode by clicking on the cursor icon on the main FRED toolbox (the very first icon). Switching to Select tool will prevent you from moving ships away unintentionally since you will have to use the rectangle selection method. Select the ship you want to have displayed as an icon and switch to the briefing editor. Click on Make Icon. That will make the icon itself, which you cannot see due to the bug in question. Click anywhere on the briefing display, preferably not on any ship or in the vicinity of the icon you have just made. That will deselect the icon, but you will have to select the icon again so you could move it: Using the rectangle selection method in the briefing display is to be used again. It will only select the _icon_ itself, not the ship. You can move or edit its properties at your discretion. To move it, switch to Move mode and press the spacebar. Tap the left button of your mouse and move the cursor to the position you want to move the icon. You will notice a 'Briefing icon' text which will help you find your way around where your icons are placed.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Nebula_background&diff=2825Nebula background2005-06-07T16:47:49Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Nebula background==<br />
<br />
You can create very nice nebula background if you are using many, low-scaled images. The optimal scaling factors are between 2 and 4, but you may choose to use larger scaling factors for more detailed (512x512, 1024x1024) images.<br />
<br />
You will also have to be familiar with how FRED handles the co-ordinates for the background images. You should move between the horizintal values of 60-280 approximately to get the nebula piece to the co-ordinates you typed in. Becoming familiar with the FRED background co-ordinate system requires experience. You can also use bank(rotation in another word), or pitch (for changing the height).<br />
<br />
Using extreme-scaled ({6,6} or higher) nebula textures is simpler, covers more space, but produces blurry results. If you want to use large scaling factors, try using the large scaling for only one axis, and using a small factor on the another axis. (Examples: {5,2} and {6,1})<br />
<br />
These are the original Volition nebula textures, sorted by their colors:<br />
<br />
=Red=<br />
*dneb01<br />
*dneb02<br />
*dneb03<br />
*dneb12<br />
*dneb18<br />
*neb01<br />
*neb02<br />
*neb03<br />
*neb12<br />
*neb18<br />
=Green=<br />
*dneb04<br />
*dneb05<br />
*dneb06<br />
*neb04<br />
*neb05<br />
*neb06<br />
*Grey*<br />
*dneb06<br />
*dneb13<br />
*neb06<br />
*neb13<br />
=Blue=<br />
*dneb07<br />
*dneb08<br />
*dneb09<br />
*dneb10<br />
*dneb11<br />
*dneb14<br />
*dneb15<br />
*dneb16<br />
*dneb17<br />
*neb07<br />
*neb08<br />
*neb09<br />
*neb10<br />
*neb11<br />
*neb14<br />
*neb15<br />
*neb16<br />
*neb17<br />
<br />
Mix RED with GREY, or BLUE with GREEN to achieve optimal nebula colour results. According to my experience, mixed nebulas of the colours RED and BLUE are somewhat ugly. But this is my opinion.<br />
<br />
One should add planets to your backgrounds only after you are satisfied with your nebula background. The reason for this is simple: the game renders the background textures according to their place in the background bitmaps queue in FRED. Therefore, the first element in the queue will be painted first, the second will be painted second and so on. In addition to this, the later elements in the queue may be placed in the foreground compared to previous elements. Thus, if you have a planet first then a nebula, you may have the planet appearing behind the nebula, instead of the nebula appearing behind the planet. Afterall, the nebulas are supposed to be many lightyears away.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Invisible_characters_in_ship_names&diff=2824Invisible characters in ship names2005-06-07T16:45:36Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==The wonders of invisible characters in names:==<br />
<br />
One of the handy features of FS2 is that its internal font does not support a lot of the high-ASCII characters, and just has a blank space instead of the actual symbol. This means that characters like ù, ø, or ¤ will appear as blank spaces inside of FS2 (but not Fred). This fact can be exploited to much benefit. <br><br />
<br><br />
For example, say I want a ship to jump out and then jump back in later in the mission. Technically this is impossible, since a ship can only be created once in a mission (i.e. once the Aquitane has been created, if he leaves or is destroyed he cannot be created again). However, it is possible to have the Aquitane jump out of the mission, and then later have the Aquitane¤ jump in. In reality, the names are different, but to the player they will look identical.<br />
<br><br />
Another example is the use of "counter ships". Say I want to give the player a directive to scan 7 of 10 cargo containers. There is no percent-ships-scanned sexp, so if I simply use the is-cargo-known-delay sexp, I will need to make a very complicated event covering every possible combination that would give me 70% scanned containers and 30% unscanned. But if I use counter ships, my life becomes much much easier:<br />
<br />
First, I place 10 hostile stealth fighters far away from the field of battle, and name them things like ¤, ÿ, þ, ú, ø, and so on. Next, I set the departure cue of each one so that it leaves when one of the cargo containers is scanned (i.e. when Cargo 1 is scanned, ¤ departs, when Cargo 2 is scanned, ÿ departs). Now in the directive I can use the nice and easy percent-ship-departed sexp with all your counter ships listed underneath it as the condition for the sexp returning true. Meanwhile, because I used high-ASCII characters for names, the ships won't even appear on the player's ship list when he presses F3--as far as he knows, they don't even exist. Remember to check "No Arrival Music" or you'll have constant battle music playing, even in quiet parts of your mission.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_balance&diff=2821Mission balance2005-06-07T16:42:56Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Tips for mission balancing==<br />
<br />
It is the author's general experience that several FS missions suffer from a well-known virus of Bad Mission Balance. To avoid BMB, you don't have to spend a penny on a special medicine or waste any seconds waiting in the queue of the chemistry, you only have to open your favourite FRED and make some changes. Let me start with very general advice:<br />
Make the mission rather easy at first. Mission balancing is something you don't have to urge doing. First, make sure all your messages show up, debriefings appear over the condition they are expected, nobody can cross your calculations by ordering transports and cruisers around etc. So, in a word, you can halt balancing the mission until it works very well. It is easier to reach the end of an easy mission than an unbearably hard one. Sometimes the thing you want to test is at the end of the mission and you simply cannot reach the end if your mission is very hard.<br />
Some real hints to fiddle with if you want to extinguish the BMB virus:<br><br />
*Adding more enemy/friendly fighters or increasing the number of enemy/friendly wings can easily result in unwanted results. Do this if one of the sides have significantly higher chance of winning. If the difference is relatively slight, this step can suddenly make the mission turn to the other side's favour. Do this only when one of the sides have significal advantage.<br><br />
*Changing weapons on fighters. The AI uses the Tornado quite well, this can also be good or bad. Bear this in mind. Make sure the fighters are compatible with the weapons you want to give them.<br><br />
*Wing arrival delay: Not only can you make your mission longer/short by changing the arrival delays, but you can normalise the number of fighters the player and his/her wingmen are going against, too.<br><br />
*Changing weapons on capital ships or transports. Removing or changing the warheads on capital ships means a lot. Take the Lilith as an example. It is much easier to attack if it does not have warheads. You can also do the same with flaks or anti-fighter beams. Do not remove or change a significant amount of weapons, modify a few of them and test. Be patient, exagerating the modifications can end up with something nasty.<br><br />
*Distances: Its importance most apparent at escort missions: you stand better chance of defending something if the enemy bombers do not arrive right in front of your defendant. However, enemy bombers can be well-armed and there can be a hell amount of them, but if you place too far them away from the target you have to defend, the mission becomes too easy.<br><br />
*Ai skill. Has little importance at attacking capital ships, but you can balance some fighters vs. fighters parts by cleverly using the Ai skill. This option does not have any effect on turrets, it only sets how effectively the Ai uses its primary weapons or evades missiles and any incoming threats. You must change the Ai of a turret individually in the Weapons editor. The higher the Ai level the better the rate of fire and accuracy in the case of laser turrets and flak guns. The writer of this part detected no impact on beams.<br><br />
*To achieve better wingmen, you can play around with events. Try doing an event that does the following: When Alpha 2's hull drops below 50%, recharge its shields and repair its hull. Do the same for Alpha 3, 4 and other wingmen. No one will notice this trick unless they play the mission just to discover how your wingmen are so powerful. :). I personally do not suggest you to do this, only when you know nothing better to lengthen the life of your beloved wingmen. You can also make events which gradually regenerate your wingmen's health. For example by 5% every second. Make sure that no regeneration will be done after your wingman in question's hull drops below 50%. People will notice when your wingman's dot turns grey from red.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Typical_FREDding_mistakes&diff=2822Typical FREDding mistakes2005-06-07T14:36:26Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Typical mistakes==<br />
<br />
In the last few months of working on the FRED Academy I've tested a whole load of missions by very new FREDders and I've noticed that often it's the same mistakes that come up time and time again. Rather than continually repeating myself I figured it might be an idea to have a little list of some of the more common FREDding mistakes I've seen.<br />
----<br />
<b>13) Poor spelling and grammar</b> <br><br />
I've not been that hard on this one while playtesting cause<br />
<br />
a) I'm not that observent and <br><br />
b) Spellchecking is something I feel should be done last of all <br><br />
c) I understand that many people here are not native english speakers.<br />
<br />
That doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to correct those things as you go along. When a mission is complete this leaps from being a low grade annoyance to a very big one. Completed missions should never ship with obvious spelling errors in them. If English isn't your first language ask for some help.<br />
----<br />
<b>12) No use of the Y-axis</b> <br><br />
Ever seen Star Trek II : Wrath of Khan. Ever got the feeling that the captains of all the ships in a mission haven't? They're all arranged on the XZ plane. No ships diving in from above or nipping in from below. While it's believable that a small convoy of ships might arrange themselves this way so as to spread their flak above and below them effectively it's harder to believe that enemy ships jumping in would somehow know what plane they were on and leap in on it.<br />
----<br />
<b>11) Poorly chained directives</b> <br><br />
This is quite a common one. If you forget to chain your Return to Base Objective it will appear at the start of the mission. Freespace is clever enough to avoid putting up a directive to kill Cancer wing if they aren't present yet but it doesn't do that for every directive. Unless you sure you don't need to you'll have to chain the directive to the event which triggers it.<br />
----<br />
<b>10) Magically completed mission objectives</b> <br><br />
A close relative of the above error. Quite often a FREDder will put in a mission objective but forget to actually put in the trigger because he means to go back and put it in later. Nothing screams out "I haven't tested this mission" quite as loud as this cause unlike the above one this one has music to draw the playtester to the fact that you've screwed up<br />
----<br />
<b>9) No use of the escort list</b> <br><br />
All major capships and anything which is mission critical should appear on the escort list. Making a ship appear there is very simple. Just go to the ships editor>>misc. Tick the escort ship box and assign a priority. All caps should be given a priority. Don't make the mistake of only giving them to the 3 most important ships in the game. If one of them is blown up the next most important ship should then appear on the list.<br />
----<br />
<b>8) Poorly chosen event and message names</b> <br><br />
This one won't affect people playing the mission but it's just plain common sense. While you might think you'll remember the arcane naming system you've chosen to use you almost certainly won't if something makes you come back to the mission in a years time to fix a bug. In addition to making your life easier it makes life easier for playtesters as they can give you the name of a faulty event/message for you to fix. Finally when you look over your mission and see an is-event-true-delay SEXP how on Earth can you tell what other event it refers to if all of them are called "event name".<br />
----<br />
<b>7) Only one RTB directive</b> <br><br />
Some missions only need to use Return to Base Directive. What some FREDders like to do is have an event that gathers up all the possible events that can end the mission and chain the RTB to that. However amongst new FREDders only one RTB is generally more indicative of a poorly thought out mission. Basically the designer thinks "Hmmm, alpha will fight this cruiser, kill the fighters and then escape with the convoy". No thought is given to what happens if something goes wrong. When this happens the mission basically continues forever because no thought was given to this possiblity.<br />
----<br />
<b>6) The Everlasting mission</b> <br><br />
A more insidious relative of the mission with only one RTB is the everlasting mission. Unlike the previous one there are RTBs in the mission but the player can do something that causes it to never appear (for instance disabling the wrong ship in the final FS2 mission can prevent Capella from going nova). Unlike the above error this isn't a newbie mistake as quite often even the professionals have failed to think of something the player might try. <br> It is seen fairly commonly in newbie missions though so I mentioned it here. As a mission designer you must actively think of ways that a player could screw up your mission and prevent them. If an enemy ship must survive the mission you must have a plan for what to do should the player disable it.<br />
----<br />
<b>5) Only one debriefing</b> <br><br />
A close relative of the the only 1 RTB error is the only one debriefing error. Basically the same logic is at work here and the mission only has a debriefing for a successfully completed mission. If anything else happens you'll only see No debriefing for mission xxxx.<br />
----<br />
<b>4) Odd naming conventions</b> <br><br />
Freespace has certain naming conventions that should be used in any mission set in the FS2 universe unless you have a damn good reason for changing it. GTVA wings are always named after letters of the greek alphabet. Enemy fighter wings are named after signs of the zodiac. Although there is more leeway in the names of capships expecting anyone to take the GTD suck my balls seriously is frowned upon.<br />
Worse than poorly thought out names is the appearance of GTC Fenris 37 as this shows that you've put no thought into the names of your ships. All capships must have a unique name. You might be able to get away with giving a Poseidon or Isis a number but that is less forgivable in a Triton or Argo.<br />
----<br />
<b>3) No delay between waves</b> <br><br />
Even in the most intense of battle there should be a few seconds delay between the death of the last ship in one wave and the next wave arriving. Otherwise it looks like the ships were lurking in subspace waiting for the death of their team mates. If you really have to avoid giving the player a breather for some reason you should still use a delay but increase the threshold for the wave so that the player is too busy with the current wave to notice the appearance of the next one.<br />
----<br />
<b>2) Poorly thought out team loadouts</b> <br><br />
This one is a biggie. The biggest mistake is the use of the D varient weapons in singleplayer. These weapons are for use in multiplayer and thus are completely useless in the singleplayer game. <br><br />
The other big mistake is having too few or too many weapons available. What's the point in 700 Helios bombs available if there are no bombers in the mission? Hell what's the point in having 700 Helios bombs available period. Similarly there's no point in making tempests available if you only give out 10 of them. <br><br />
A minor mistake is having a loadout consisting only of 5 myrmidons when everyone is already in myrmidons. Why bother putting anything in the ship loadout in that case? <br><br />
(The last two will become somewhat moot once the SCP introduce a resource tracking element to campaigns but if you're not using that they are still worth mentioning).<br />
----<br />
1) And the biggest/most common mistake of all is.....<br />
<br />
<b>No AWOL Debriefing*</b><br />
<br />
This is the debriefing that appears if you leave the battle when you weren't told to do so. A lot of newbies think that this one is added automatically so they don't put it in. But if you think about it, how does FS2 know whether you were supposed to leave them mission or not? A good AWOL debriefing should check if any of the conditions allowing you to leave have come true. In addition the other debriefing sections should check and *not* be played if the AWOL one was (Why would Commmand applaud you for protecting a ship if they are about to take you out and shoot you!) Basically this is an offshoot of the only one debriefing error but it's so common even in people who've got several debriefing stages that it was worthy of special mention.<br />
<br />
=See also=<br />
[http://dynamic4.gamespy.com/~freespace/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29567 Original Source]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Typical_FREDding_mistakes&diff=17Typical FREDding mistakes2005-06-07T14:35:58Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Typical mistakes==<br />
<br />
In the last few months of working on the FRED Academy I've tested a whole load of missions by very new FREDders and I've noticed that often it's the same mistakes that come up time and time again. Rather than continually repeating myself I figured it might be an idea to have a little list of some of the more common FREDding mistakes I've seen.<br />
----<br />
<b>13) Poor spelling and grammar</b> <br><br />
I've not been that hard on this one while playtesting cause<br />
<br />
a) I'm not that observent and <br><br />
b) Spellchecking is something I feel should be done last of all <br><br />
c) I understand that many people here are not native english speakers.<br />
<br />
That doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to correct those things as you go along. When a mission is complete this leaps from being a low grade annoyance to a very big one. Completed missions should never ship with obvious spelling errors in them. If English isn't your first language ask for some help.<br />
----<br />
<b>12) No use of the Y-axis[/b] <br><br />
Ever seen Star Trek II : Wrath of Khan. Ever got the feeling that the captains of all the ships in a mission haven't? They're all arranged on the XZ plane. No ships diving in from above or nipping in from below. While it's believable that a small convoy of ships might arrange themselves this way so as to spread their flak above and below them effectively it's harder to believe that enemy ships jumping in would somehow know what plane they were on and leap in on it.<br />
----<br />
<b>11) Poorly chained directives</b> <br><br />
This is quite a common one. If you forget to chain your Return to Base Objective it will appear at the start of the mission. Freespace is clever enough to avoid putting up a directive to kill Cancer wing if they aren't present yet but it doesn't do that for every directive. Unless you sure you don't need to you'll have to chain the directive to the event which triggers it.<br />
----<br />
<b>10) Magically completed mission objectives</b> <br><br />
A close relative of the above error. Quite often a FREDder will put in a mission objective but forget to actually put in the trigger because he means to go back and put it in later. Nothing screams out "I haven't tested this mission" quite as loud as this cause unlike the above one this one has music to draw the playtester to the fact that you've screwed up<br />
----<br />
<b>9) No use of the escort list</b> <br><br />
All major capships and anything which is mission critical should appear on the escort list. Making a ship appear there is very simple. Just go to the ships editor>>misc. Tick the escort ship box and assign a priority. All caps should be given a priority. Don't make the mistake of only giving them to the 3 most important ships in the game. If one of them is blown up the next most important ship should then appear on the list.<br />
----<br />
<b>8) Poorly chosen event and message names</b> <br><br />
This one won't affect people playing the mission but it's just plain common sense. While you might think you'll remember the arcane naming system you've chosen to use you almost certainly won't if something makes you come back to the mission in a years time to fix a bug. In addition to making your life easier it makes life easier for playtesters as they can give you the name of a faulty event/message for you to fix. Finally when you look over your mission and see an is-event-true-delay SEXP how on Earth can you tell what other event it refers to if all of them are called "event name".<br />
----<br />
<b>7) Only one RTB directive</b> <br><br />
Some missions only need to use Return to Base Directive. What some FREDders like to do is have an event that gathers up all the possible events that can end the mission and chain the RTB to that. However amongst new FREDders only one RTB is generally more indicative of a poorly thought out mission. Basically the designer thinks "Hmmm, alpha will fight this cruiser, kill the fighters and then escape with the convoy". No thought is given to what happens if something goes wrong. When this happens the mission basically continues forever because no thought was given to this possiblity.<br />
----<br />
<b>6) The Everlasting mission</b> <br><br />
A more insidious relative of the mission with only one RTB is the everlasting mission. Unlike the previous one there are RTBs in the mission but the player can do something that causes it to never appear (for instance disabling the wrong ship in the final FS2 mission can prevent Capella from going nova). Unlike the above error this isn't a newbie mistake as quite often even the professionals have failed to think of something the player might try. <br> It is seen fairly commonly in newbie missions though so I mentioned it here. As a mission designer you must actively think of ways that a player could screw up your mission and prevent them. If an enemy ship must survive the mission you must have a plan for what to do should the player disable it.<br />
----<br />
<b>5) Only one debriefing</b> <br><br />
A close relative of the the only 1 RTB error is the only one debriefing error. Basically the same logic is at work here and the mission only has a debriefing for a successfully completed mission. If anything else happens you'll only see No debriefing for mission xxxx.<br />
----<br />
<b>4) Odd naming conventions</b> <br><br />
Freespace has certain naming conventions that should be used in any mission set in the FS2 universe unless you have a damn good reason for changing it. GTVA wings are always named after letters of the greek alphabet. Enemy fighter wings are named after signs of the zodiac. Although there is more leeway in the names of capships expecting anyone to take the GTD suck my balls seriously is frowned upon.<br />
Worse than poorly thought out names is the appearance of GTC Fenris 37 as this shows that you've put no thought into the names of your ships. All capships must have a unique name. You might be able to get away with giving a Poseidon or Isis a number but that is less forgivable in a Triton or Argo.<br />
----<br />
<b>3) No delay between waves</b> <br><br />
Even in the most intense of battle there should be a few seconds delay between the death of the last ship in one wave and the next wave arriving. Otherwise it looks like the ships were lurking in subspace waiting for the death of their team mates. If you really have to avoid giving the player a breather for some reason you should still use a delay but increase the threshold for the wave so that the player is too busy with the current wave to notice the appearance of the next one.<br />
----<br />
<b>2) Poorly thought out team loadouts</b> <br><br />
This one is a biggie. The biggest mistake is the use of the D varient weapons in singleplayer. These weapons are for use in multiplayer and thus are completely useless in the singleplayer game. <br><br />
The other big mistake is having too few or too many weapons available. What's the point in 700 Helios bombs available if there are no bombers in the mission? Hell what's the point in having 700 Helios bombs available period. Similarly there's no point in making tempests available if you only give out 10 of them. <br><br />
A minor mistake is having a loadout consisting only of 5 myrmidons when everyone is already in myrmidons. Why bother putting anything in the ship loadout in that case? <br><br />
(The last two will become somewhat moot once the SCP introduce a resource tracking element to campaigns but if you're not using that they are still worth mentioning).<br />
----<br />
1) And the biggest/most common mistake of all is.....<br />
<br />
<b>No AWOL Debriefing*</b><br />
<br />
This is the debriefing that appears if you leave the battle when you weren't told to do so. A lot of newbies think that this one is added automatically so they don't put it in. But if you think about it, how does FS2 know whether you were supposed to leave them mission or not? A good AWOL debriefing should check if any of the conditions allowing you to leave have come true. In addition the other debriefing sections should check and *not* be played if the AWOL one was (Why would Commmand applaud you for protecting a ship if they are about to take you out and shoot you!) Basically this is an offshoot of the only one debriefing error but it's so common even in people who've got several debriefing stages that it was worthy of special mention.<br />
<br />
=See also=<br />
[http://dynamic4.gamespy.com/~freespace/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29567 Original Source]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=General_hints_(FRED)&diff=59General hints (FRED)2005-06-07T14:30:36Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==General hints for FREDing==<br />
<br />
*Use the Y-axis and rotate most of your ships on one or more of the axes to give a more realistic feeling <br><br />
*Use the Selection Lock if you have selected all the ships you want to rotate/move. This will make it sure you do not select an unwanted craft by chance. <br><br />
*If you want a directive to appear only after a specified thing happens, you can use the event chaining in the following way: <br><br />
Put all the conditionals to one event. Chain the next event(which is the actual directive) to the previous event with a delay of at least 1 second. <br><br />
This will make it sure the event will not appear sooner then desired. This is especially useful if you want Command to order the desctruction/capture/inspection of a ship/subsystem. <br><br />
*Use the designer's notes field to note down changes you want to do later. <br><br />
*Learning and using Keyboard shortcuts makes your life easier. <br><br />
*If you do not want a ship to open fire, simply use the turret-lock-all SEXP instead of disarming all the turrets manually. <br><br />
*If you want to use a special, non-docking support ship, you have to make changes in the tables. You cannot simply place a Support ship and disallow all player orders. <br><br />
*Always remove player orders for ship classes other than fighters or bombers. By default, the player can give orders to transports, freighers, cruisers etc. which can often deteriorate the mission. If you give the 'Attack my ship' order to a transport that is supposed to board and capture an other ship, it will not follow its default orders until the player-given orders are accomplished. <br><br />
*If you do not want a ship destroyed, but you want to make its subsystems destroyable, use the ship-guardian SEXP!<br />
*Increasing/decreasing the skill level of single turrets also affect the rate of fire. It is advised to increase the level of sentry guns by at least one rank <br><br />
*Pressing TAB while having multiple ships selected changes the central point of rotation. If you start rotating, that ship will be the center of the circle your ships will be rotated around. The same is true for moving, the selected 'cetral' ship will be moving with the cursor. <br><br />
*If you get lost on the grid, press SHIFT-Z. Or, zoom on any of the ships by selecting the fighter in the Selection Menu(H) and pressing ALT-Z <br><br />
*Use the Selection Mode to make sure you will not make any changes in rotation/moves of ships unintentionally. <br><br />
*Diversify the orders of wingmen by using the add-goal SEXP <br><br />
*Diversify the mission by using variables. [Variables] can be used for randomising.<br />
<br />
=See also= <br><br />
[[Typical mistakes]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=General_hints_(FRED)&diff=16General hints (FRED)2005-06-07T14:29:36Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==General hints for FREDing==<br />
<br />
*Use the Y-axis and rotate most of your ships on one or more of the axes to give a more realistic feeling <br><br />
*Use the Selection Lock if you have selected all the ships you want to rotate/move. This will make it sure you do not select an unwanted craft by chance. <br><br />
*If you want a directive to appear only after a specified thing happens, you can use the event chaining in the following way: <br><br />
Put all the conditionals to one event. Chain the next event(which is the actual directive) to the previous event with a delay of at least 1 second. <br><br />
This will make it sure the event will not appear sooner then desired. This is especially useful if you want Command to order the desctruction/capture/inspection of a ship/subsystem. <br><br />
*Use the designer's notes field to note down changes you want to do later. <br><br />
*Learning and using Keyboard shortcuts makes your life easier. <br><br />
*If you do not want a ship to open fire, simply use the turret-lock-all SEXP instead of disarming all the turrets manually. <br><br />
*If you want to use a special, non-docking support ship, you have to make changes in the tables. You cannot simply place a Support ship and disallow all player orders. <br><br />
*Always remove player orders for ship classes other than fighters or bombers. By default, the player can give orders to transports, freighers, cruisers etc. which can often deteriorate the mission. If you give the 'Attack my ship' order to a transport that is supposed to board and capture an other ship, it will not follow its default orders until the player-given orders are accomplished. <br><br />
*If you do not want a ship destroyed, but you want to make its subsystems destroyable, use the ship-guardian SEXP!<br />
*Increasing/decreasing the skill level of single turrets also affect the rate of fire. It is advised to increase the level of sentry guns by at least one rank <br><br />
*Pressing TAB while having multiple ships selected changes the central point of rotation. If you start rotating, that ship will be the center of the circle your ships will be rotated around. The same is true for moving, the selected 'cetral' ship will be moving with the cursor. <br><br />
*If you get lost on the grid, press SHIFT-Z. Or, zoom on any of the ships by selecting the fighter in the Selection Menu(H) and pressing ALT-Z <br><br />
*Use the Selection Mode to make sure you will not make any changes in rotation/moves of ships unintentionally. <br><br />
*Diversify the orders of wingmen by using the add-goal SEXP <br><br />
*Diversify the mission by using variables. [Variables] can be used for randomising.<br />
<br />
=See also=: <br><br />
[[Typical mistakes]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=List_of_FRED-related_topics&diff=58List of FRED-related topics2005-06-07T14:28:52Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>===FRED Tips=== <br><br />
----<br />
==General topics==<br />
<br />
*[[General hints]] <br><br />
*[[Typical mistakes]] <br><br />
*[[Tips for mission balancing]] <br><br />
----<br />
==Specific topics==<br />
<br />
*[[The wonders of invisible characters in names]] <br><br />
*[[Nebula background]] <br><br />
*[[Variables]] <br><br />
*[[Beating the briefing icon bug of FRED_Open]] <br><br />
*[[Convoys]] <br><br />
*[[Enemy wing names]] <br><br />
*[[Advice for testing]]<br />
*[[Very simple missions]]<br />
----<br />
==Hints for mission types==<br />
<br />
*[[Escort Missions]] <br><br />
*[[Strike Missions]] <br><br />
*[[Capture Missions]] <br></div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=List_of_FRED-related_topics&diff=15List of FRED-related topics2005-06-07T14:28:25Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>===FRED Tips=== <br><br />
----<br />
==General topics==<br />
<br />
*[[General hints]] <br><br />
*[[Typical mistakes]] <br><br />
*[[Tips for mission balancing]] <br><br />
----<br />
!Specific topics<br />
<br />
*[[The wonders of invisible characters in names]] <br><br />
*[[Nebula background]] <br><br />
*[[Variables]] <br><br />
*[[Beating the briefing icon bug of FRED_Open]] <br><br />
*[[Convoys]] <br><br />
*[[Enemy wing names]] <br><br />
*[[Advice for testing]]<br />
*[[Very simple missions]]<br />
----<br />
!Hints for mission types<br />
<br />
*[[Escort Missions]] <br><br />
*[[Strike Missions]] <br><br />
*[[Capture Missions]] <br></div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Mission_design&diff=25Mission design2005-06-07T14:26:39Z<p>81.182.81.212: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Welcome to the Mission design part of the FreeSpace Wikipedia.<br> <br><br />
<br>[[FRED Tips]]<br />
<br>[[FRED Basics]]</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=18Main Page2005-06-07T14:24:57Z<p>81.182.81.212: /* Modding */</p>
<hr />
<div>Welcome to the Freespace 2 Wiki! If you don't already have Freespace, check out the [[Getting Freespace]] section.<br />
<br />
== Freespace 1 ==<br />
<br />
== Freespace 2 ==<br />
<br />
== Freespace Source Code Project ==<br />
=== Getting Started ===<br />
[[FSSCP Introduction]]<br />
<br>[[Installing fs2_open]]<br />
<br>[[Troubleshooting]]<br />
<br>[[Bug Reporting]]<br />
=== Modding ===<br />
[[Mission design]]<br />
<br>[[Modelling]]<br />
<br>[[Texturing]]<br />
==== File types ====<br />
[[*.VP]]<br />
<br>[[*.POF]]<br />
<br>[[*.FS2]]<br />
<br>[[*.PLR/*.PL2]]<br />
<br>[[*.CSG/*.CSS]]<br />
<br>[[*.CS2]]<br />
<br />
=== Multiplayer ===<br />
[[Getting Started with FS2netD]]<br />
<br>[[Logging On]]<br />
<br />
== Freespace Universe == <br />
[[Timeline]]<br />
<br>[[Stars and Planets]]<br />
<br>[[Species]]<br />
<br>[[Politics]]<br />
<br>[[Ships]]<br />
<br>[[Weapons]]<br />
<br>[[Technologies]]<br />
<br>[[Corporations]]<br />
<br>[[Freespace Lingo]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Wiki software successfully installed.<br />
<br />
Please see [http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_i18n documentation on customizing the interface]<br />
and the [http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_User%27s_Guide User's Guide] for usage and configuration help.</div>81.182.81.212https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=14Main Page2005-06-07T14:24:37Z<p>81.182.81.212: /* Modding */</p>
<hr />
<div>Welcome to the Freespace 2 Wiki! If you don't already have Freespace, check out the [[Getting Freespace]] section.<br />
<br />
== Freespace 1 ==<br />
<br />
== Freespace 2 ==<br />
<br />
== Freespace Source Code Project ==<br />
=== Getting Started ===<br />
[[FSSCP Introduction]]<br />
<br>[[Installing fs2_open]]<br />
<br>[[Troubleshooting]]<br />
<br>[[Bug Reporting]]<br />
=== Modding ===<br />
[Mission design]<br />
<br>[Modelling]<br />
<br>[Texturing]<br />
==== File types ====<br />
[[*.VP]]<br />
<br>[[*.POF]]<br />
<br>[[*.FS2]]<br />
<br>[[*.PLR/*.PL2]]<br />
<br>[[*.CSG/*.CSS]]<br />
<br>[[*.CS2]]<br />
<br />
=== Multiplayer ===<br />
[[Getting Started with FS2netD]]<br />
<br>[[Logging On]]<br />
<br />
== Freespace Universe == <br />
[[Timeline]]<br />
<br>[[Stars and Planets]]<br />
<br>[[Species]]<br />
<br>[[Politics]]<br />
<br>[[Ships]]<br />
<br>[[Weapons]]<br />
<br>[[Technologies]]<br />
<br>[[Corporations]]<br />
<br>[[Freespace Lingo]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Wiki software successfully installed.<br />
<br />
Please see [http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_i18n documentation on customizing the interface]<br />
and the [http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_User%27s_Guide User's Guide] for usage and configuration help.</div>81.182.81.212