Interview Immersion and the classics with Ken Levine

[DarkUnderlord]

Tags: BioShock; Ken Levine

<a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4082/ken_levine_on_studio_culture_from_.php">GamaSutra interview Ken Levine</a>. Posting because he mentions Thief, Bethesda, Planescape: Torment and maturity:
<br>
<blockquote>KL: Well, I think one of the challenges is, when we make games, generally we don't make games that rely on the most traditional methodology of storytelling in games, which is cutscenes. That's not our thing, generally. Certainly it wasn't our thing on System Shock and BioShock.
<br>
<br>
And I'm a big proponent of that, because I'm a big believer that what games do well is immerse people in worlds, and put people in scenarios that feel like there's not a layer between them and the experience. Like in a movie, you're just sitting, watching this activity onscreen; with a cutscene you just sit back in your chair.
<br>
<br>
What is that moment that we want out of game playing? We want that moment we forget we're in front of the computer, in front of the Xbox 360, in front of the PS3. We want that moment where we're immersed, and we're in that thing. And so, if I can tell a story without that layer, without that, "Okay, now you're participating in entertainment" -- where you forget that you're participating in entertainment, where you just think you're having an experience. That's the golden ideal, right?
<br>
[...]
<br>
<b>You talked about being influenced by a lot of old games, like Ultima Underworld, that were immersive, and you have what I'd consider a traditional PC gaming background. Can you talk about the culture of people who come from that background, who embrace those kinds of games?</b>
<br>
<br>
KL: I think there's a great creative tension. We have a lot of guys here -- a lot of oldschool Looking Glass guys here. And when I came to Looking Glass, there was definitely a tension, even a transition, going on. I remember the arguments we had on Thief. When I was working on Thief, it was, "Well, should we have mouselook in the game?"
<br>
<br>
Because there were a lot of people that thought, "No, you don't have mouselook, and there should be inventory screens..." and Thief almost didn't have weapons equippable by the number keys, and almost didn't have mouselook, because there was certainly an oldschool/newschool thing going on.
<br>
[...]
<br>
But I think if you don't read the classics, it's hard to write new classics. And, so, we read the classics here. There's no doubt that we read the classics. And I think, sometimes, the challenge, more, with some of the oldschool guys, is, "Hey, look at the new stuff as well!" But I think it's good, though, because we have a mix.
<br>
[...]
<br>
And I think it's not an accident. You look at the great developers now? Of console games? Bungie, and Lionhead. You look at BioWare; you look at Bethesda; and where do they all come from? They come from the PC side. Valve? They come from the PC side.
<br>
[...]
<br>
Also, I think, the maturity of some of the experiences. You know, you had things like Thief; you had things like Planescape: Torment; you had things like Half-Life on the PC side, which I think were more sophisticated narrative scene-wise, than on console counterparts at the time. All of that maturity came over, was brought over from the PC side. Now it's the console side, and most of my favorite console developers came from the PC world.</blockquote>
<br>
One wonders how rope arrows would've worked without mouse look but anywho...
<br>
<br>
Spotted @ <a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com">GameBanshee</a>

 

[JarlFrank]

Also, I think, the maturity of some of the experiences. You know, you had things like Thief; you had things like Planescape: Torment; you had things like Half-Life on the PC side, which I think were more sophisticated narrative scene-wise, than on console counterparts at the time. All of that maturity came over, was brought over from the PC side. Now it's the console side, and most of my favorite console developers came from the PC world.

Hum. Empty marketing speech again? Trying to justify the movement to consoles? Trying to make console gamers look smarter than they are?

Cause I definitely don't associate the new consoles with maturity, sophisticated storytelling and unique gameplay. More like the exact difference. Console mass market = reason for dumbing down.

 

[MetalCraze]

Ken Levine is a symbol of gaming decline.
If only Bioshock wasn't such tremendous piece of shit with lots of retard-friendly indicators that make Bethesda envy you, Ken. Maturity - like a motherfucking TIP that shows over a propaganda poster that says: "this is a propaganda poster".

 

[Hory]

More like Ken Decline amirite?

 

[skyway]

More like Ken Decline amirite?

I actually smiled.

The Codex needs a post rating system! A là Slashdot.

 

[Jim Cojones]

(...) production of its as-yet unannounced title, which Levine calls "more ambitious than anything we've ever done... substantially more ambitious than BioShock."

 

[Secretninja]

I liked Bioshock. It was entertaining, and I got to shoot people.

 

[Morgoth]

Bioshock was very racist, because there was not a single Nigger in the game.

 

[Forest Dweller]

He puts Thief and Half Life in the same sentence with PST when talking about "sophisticated narrative." That tells you how full of shit he is.

More like Ken Decline amirite?

I actually smiled.

skyway never smiles.

 

[entertainer]

Ken was cool with Irrational Games, and it all went downhill with 2k and biococks

 

[Jaesun]

So Planescape Torment is now an industry buzzword?

While not the greatest game of all time, Bioshock is much more enjoyable than fallout 3. At least the writing is not as cringe worthy.

 

[Oarfish]

"more ambitious than anything we've ever done... substantially more ambitious than BioShock."

Haloised xcom at a guess, with a commander Shepard a like banging his fist on the table at a budget meeting with the UN before you have to help shoot down 300 ufos from the turret on top of your transport to save humanity against all the odds.

 

[bhlaab]

Yeah, it's awesome that all these great pc developers are refusing to make games for the pc. It really suits them.

Yeah, let's try to take X-Com and make it playable with joysticks. That makes sense. It'll be exactly the same. No wait, it'll be better than the same it will be evolved. (cutting out 80% of the features is the same as evolving)

 

[bhlaab]

Bioshock was a very pretty and very atmospheric game with a very interesting story and VERY novel setting. As for the gameplay, I'm not entirely sure there was any.

 

[Darth Roxor]

a very interesting story and VERY novel setting.

An utopia turns into a dystopia after trying to create ubermenschen.

How interesting and novel.

 

[bhlaab]

a very interesting story and VERY novel setting.

An utopia turns into a dystopia after trying to create ubermenschen.

How interesting and novel.

yeah an underwater city steeped in ayn rand objectivism you see that shit all the time

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

a very interesting story and VERY novel setting.

An utopia turns into a dystopia after trying to create ubermenschen.

How interesting and novel.

yeah an underwater city steeped in ayn rand objectivism you see that shit all the time

But it wasn't. Ryan spouted off some objectivist quotes, but that's really it for "serious" themes. The stuff like bribe-able turrets and cameras was pure cheese, as were the vending machines full of guns and ammo.

It looked nice. That's about it.

 

[ScottishMartialArts]

He puts Thief and Half Life in the same sentence with PST when talking about "sophisticated narrative."

What's wrong with Thief's narrative? A straightforward yet very effective plot. Memorable and well-written characters. A very novel world and setting that they don't get bogged down explaining every detail of, letting your imagination fill in the rest. Multiple modes of exposition that don't just depend on characters explaining the plot to you a la Metal Gear Solid. Overall I thought Thief told a great story in great style with some very sharp writing.

 

[The Feral Kid]

He puts Thief and Half Life in the same sentence with PST when talking about "sophisticated narrative." That tells you how full of shit he is.

No. That tells us how much full shit you are. Thief and Half-Life are not rpgs to afford the luxury of elaborate and long dialogue. They belong to genres that exposition to the story is handled through different means by definition. They're not less sophisticated but just different and both great examples of storytelling.

 

[Alex]

And I'm a big proponent of that, because I'm a big believer that what games do well is immerse people in worlds, and put people in scenarios that feel like there's not a layer between them and the experience. Like in a movie, you're just sitting, watching this activity onscreen; with a cutscene you just sit back in your chair.

This left me somewhat puzzled. I didn't agree with what Mr. Levine was saying, but I couldn't quite tell why. Here is what I am thinking: I agree that the immersion, the ability a game has to make you feel as if you were inside someone else's shoes, can be the defining point of a game. It is also obvious that denser layers between the player and the game will make the experience harder to reach. However, does it mean that it is just harder to get to that point of the experience, or does it mean that the whole experience of being inside your character's head is diluted? Personally, I think any good UI will eventually get to a level that it is "groked". From then on, it will be pratically an extension of the player, like driving a car.

Also, I can't help but feel that requiring simpler UIs would end up limiting the depth of the experience. For example, if a game allowed you to build mechanical devices by connecting various machine parts, then a UI like that of half life, where you can only hold things in front of you or drop them, would be unsatisfactory. However, as soon as you add two different types of UI, you increase the distance between the player and the imaginary events of the game. However, if you limit the complexity of the actions that the player can do, you limit too much the kinds of games available.

Finally, there is also the issue that different situations may require different levels of focusing to remain interesting, and thus, immersive. For example, if a game allows the player to train a variety of skills, with different trainers, it probably won't be a good idea to make him hit press the left mouse button 100 times to earn any bonus. Half-Live 2, if I remember correctly, actually never broke the continuity of the action. In one point, the player is transported some time in the future only so the plot can walk without the need of a "2 weeks later". While managing to do this may be something to be proud of, I don't think that it is the only way to keep immersion. This also puts a lot of restrictions on how the story of a game can flow.

Finally, I think that avoiding different/more intrusive UIs, eliminating complexity that can't be fitted in a organic way to control the PC and avoiding to break the continuum of the action cut away other possible ways to achieve immersion. For example, a roguelike may provide an interesting advancement system where the character is given monstrous traits at every new level (such as horns or various arms). One might argue that since there is no graphical representation of these, the abilities won't really feel like traits, but simply numbers in a character sheet.
However, the game rules can make the traits feel like what was intended of them. A character who develops scales and suddenly need constant access to water is, in my view, much better for immersion than a scally 3d model.

 

[Forest Dweller]

What's wrong with Thief's narrative? A straightforward yet very effective plot. Memorable and well-written characters. A very novel world and setting that they don't get bogged down explaining every detail of, letting your imagination fill in the rest. Multiple modes of exposition that don't just depend on characters explaining the plot to you a la Metal Gear Solid. Overall I thought Thief told a great story in great style with some very sharp writing.

There's nothing wrong with it. But there is something very wrong with putting it on the same level as PST.

No. That tells us how much full shit you are. Thief and Half-Life are not rpgs to afford the luxury of elaborate and long dialogue. They belong to genres that exposition to the story is handled through different means by definition. They're not less sophisticated but just different and both great examples of storytelling.

That's right, let's go easy on them because they happen to be in a genre that (supposedly) can't allow as much sophistication as PST. Of course, never mind that said lack of sophistication should be a determining factor when talking about story, because in your apologist world that simply wouldn't do, would it?

 

[Fat Dragon]

What's wrong with Thief's narrative? A straightforward yet very effective plot. Memorable and well-written characters. A very novel world and setting that they don't get bogged down explaining every detail of, letting your imagination fill in the rest. Multiple modes of exposition that don't just depend on characters explaining the plot to you a la Metal Gear Solid. Overall I thought Thief told a great story in great style with some very sharp writing.

There's nothing wrong with it. But there is something very wrong with putting it on the same level as PST.

What are you going on about? He was just simply listing off examples of games that had good story lines at the time to illustrate a point. It's not like he was comparing them and choosing which was better.

 

[RK47]

What's wrong with Thief's narrative? A straightforward yet very effective plot. Memorable and well-written characters. A very novel world and setting that they don't get bogged down explaining every detail of, letting your imagination fill in the rest. Multiple modes of exposition that don't just depend on characters explaining the plot to you a la Metal Gear Solid. Overall I thought Thief told a great story in great style with some very sharp writing.

There's nothing wrong with it. But there is something very wrong with putting it on the same level as PST.

What are you going on about? He was just simply listing off examples of games that had good story lines at the time to illustrate a point. It's not like he was comparing them and choosing which was better.

comparing...which...is...better?....DISCUSS!

 

[Forest Dweller]

What are you going on about? He was just simply listing off examples of games that had good story lines at the time to illustrate a point. It's not like he was comparing them and choosing which was better.

That's like talking about quality RPGs, and then listing Fallout, Kotor, and Mass Effect.

And you know we hear shit like that and get pissed off about it all the time.

 

[Qwinn]

I haven't played Thief, but I can imagine it as having mature storytelling.

But Half Life as "mature storytelling"? Really. Really? I don't remember any decent storytelling at all, at least not in the first one.

"Oh look, eeeevil corporation opens a hole to hell, monsters spew out, must kill them and evil corporationy mercs."

Fin.

It was a decent game for what it was, about one of the only shooters I ever actually finished (along with Max Payne), but to describe it as mature storytelling is just fail.

Qwinn