Parting of the Ways: How Authors in Non-linear Stories Affect Virtual Identities of Players
In my master thesis, I have studied how the in-game narrative structures contribute to constructing a player’s virtual identity. Here, in the Medium article, I would like to discuss the crucial finding useful for game designers and narrative designers.
Narrative structure and identity
Non-linear stories are the ones that give players the unique experience of interactivity with fiction. Traditional forms of fiction imply players to be side viewers of the events that consequently unveil one after another. When we watch “Les Miserables” in the theatre the second time, we do not expect Javert to suddenly join Jean Valjean somewhere in the middle of this tragedy. Linear storytelling limits the factual scope we can face interacting with fiction like Les Miserables.
However, any piece of fiction consists not only of facts. The ideas traditionally connect the events, characters, and scenes. People can relate to them and coherently systematize their opinions in the form of a particular identity. There are many ways to define identity regarding the research question and the features you are interested in. In this article, I would like to focus on virtual identity, which a player might not clearly recognize but is still present in observable actions and choices.
Games with a well-developed non-linear narrative structure are great for the construction of virtual identity, as many choices include players’ reflection over complex ideas.
You have written a branch where the player has to choose between supporting either a tyrant with recognized authority or a kind young person unknown to the people. As the player goes deeper into the narrative, the choice becomes more complex. The tyrant has prosecuted those who questioned his decisions, but his actions significantly helped the country in the absence of an actual ruler. His opponent worked as a doctor during the civil war but occasionally had to become the squad commander. Due to the lack of experience, many of his people died. Can we say that having the kind-hearted healer without the authority and experience as a ruler is better than the tyrant who knows what to do?
Players traditionally face choices like that, and the narrative designers write them in the way no right answer can be given. It happens so because the question is ideological at its core. The decision may inform us whether the player supports strong authoritarian ruling or weak but more ethical from the perspective of consensual moral norms. However, in this case, there is no additional narrative depth. You cannot read the in-game books right now to decide (or some lore-related literature outside of the game). Because of this, your choice is informed by the lack of information, and thus the virtual identity construction suffers it too. Let’s talk about it in detail.
Limited by authors
Traditionally, we suppose that identity can be clarified by conducting interviews, surveys, or observations. However, in virtual spaces, our methodological choices are narrower because players rarely perceive the decisions they make as something that reflects their beliefs or views. Many players relate to the in-game narrative as “just a game,” Thus, it is difficult to ask them directly about the relationship between their views on democracy and whom they support in certain Dragon Age conflicts.
It does not mean that interpreting players’ actions regardless of their intentions is the best way to clarify identity, but it still gives us various insights about the possible contribution of narrative structure to identity construction. And the first thing to consider is that authors may seriously limit the identification possibilities of the player by the non-reflective depiction of their own views in the branching story. Let’s say that we have several groups of players in the game:
- Lorewalkers. They play, awaiting to be deeply involved in the narrative. These people read all texts in Dragon Age and replay such a game several times to find out the complete stories of every companion. They also explore the global context (books written in this game universe, authors’ personality).
- Skeptics. These players are ready to embrace the narrative if it engages them at some point. Traditionally, they convert to Lorewalkers if that happens. Most players are Skeptics, as we usually estimate the game using various criteria, and the narrative might not be the strongest side of the particular title.
- Cold-blooded. You may often find the players who come to Skyrim just for fishing. They are mostly indifferent to the narrative and may often return to the game because of the gameplay mechanics.
Now, let’s say that as narrative designers, we suppose that our task is also to build an engaging story that provides as many possibilities for identity construction as possible. The obvious thing is that the depth of the written story for that task is illusionary different for each of the groups we have mentioned. We may say that Lorewalkers will engage anyway and thus build the identity with any material, while Cold-blooded players require so much precision in the narrative structure that other elements will suffer a lot.
However, in fact, all the groups will have to deal with the same problems if the author does not reflect on how they want to depict the ideological conflict in the narrative branch. Should there be two choices? Is the additional lore visible to the player? How can the player make a choice addressing all the facts?
It might seem obvious that the narrative components should be written profoundly. Your characters should have fruitful personalities, events might have the consistent logic of emergence, and the ideas should be coherently developed. But when it comes to the narrative structure, authors often think that it is enough just to outline the choice without putting additional efforts into the other components of the choice’s setup. Let’s ask ourselves the following questions.
- Why does this choice exist?
- What idea lies under this choice?
- Why should the player struggle?
These are essential content questions that traditionally lead us to the well-written branch. However, they are not directly related to structure. Now, let’s explore other questions.
- How are the stakeholders of this choice introduced to the player?
- How the events that led to this choice were depicted to the player?
- Which facts related to this choice can the player grasp from the lorebooks? From the out-of-game literature?
- How is the choice delivered regarding the game conventions?
In the well-written non-linear stories like Dragon Age, these questions are mostly covered, and still, we sometimes have this feeling that “it was possible to go the other way in this case.” After answering the questions above, the author decided to limit the choice in a certain way, stressing out the ideological and dramatic accents they considered necessary. This limitation (to some degree) is impossible to overcome. However, it seriously affects the possible identity construction.
Narrative designers are researchers
We usually forget that the narrative structure and its content are connected through the critical exploration of the author’s beliefs conducted… by the author. If you ask the player to choose between the tyrant and the kind-hearted doctor, the way you depict this choice (questions about structure) and conceptualize it (questions about content) rely on your own political or social beliefs. If you are not aware of them, there is a risk some choice option is conveyed to the player with the lower narrative depth.
Can we say that the identity of the Lorewalker player will change significantly because of this flaw? Yes. And the difference will probably be the same as with the Cold-blooded player. When you see the choice option that appeals to your views, you will probably stick to it. You will probably choose the most appropriate option regarding the context, even if the situation does not allow you to make a choice you would like to. However, when the author is unaware of their own beliefs, the options seem unrealistic and too “conditional.” Such a writing pattern shows itself both in the content and in the narrative’s structure. The player will form a fake virtual identity that does not reflect either their real-world views, or contextual views.
In this way, a narrative designer that aims at engaging the player through the construction of virtual identity should act as a researcher. The non-linear narrative structure allows making some sort of virtual discourse between the player and the author. It is a dynamic system of communication, where the player feels the author’s beliefs just like the author predicts which possible views their players may have.
Lorewalkers, Skeptics, and Cold-blooded players are all sensitive to what is happening on the screen since the narrative is not only in the text. Gameplay, models, level design, and other elements also include some pieces of narrative that appear to be crucial for believing that this character is a tyrant indeed, while this one really healed people during the war.
The researcher should always question themselves whether their political and social views affect their research process or not. In 99% of cases, they will. Therefore, it is crucial to put lots of effort into understanding how you can take them into account. For narrative designers, the task is quite the same. The only significant difference is that the game is a piece of art, and thus to put there your own beliefs is clearly a good thing. However, in the case of non-linear narratives, such an approach may lead to the fake identity problem, and that is why it is better to find a balanced decision.
Just as with researchers, I doubt there is a universal way to build a narrative that does not explicitly impose the author’s views on the player. The virtual identity construction clearly allows the player to feel more engaged with the story. Probably, it is one of the core methods to turn the one from Skeptics to Lorewalkers. However, it will require the author to focus on the pluralism of ideas rather than the question of “what is right to me.”
You might say that many authors use this approach today with the grey morality concept, but you should ask yourself whether they are successful with using it. It is not enough just to show the player the essentially contested concept or the “grey” character motivation. Non-linear narratives clearly show us that any choice is the dialogue between the player and the author. It would be nice always to remember that dialogue necessarily includes more than one person.
