Storytelling through gameplay in Atom Zombie Smasher and Trapped Dead

Robsavillo
Friday, March 18, 2011

Ben and Harry just can’t see eye to eye. Ever the resourceful hero, Ben wants to stay upstairs, where he can see out of the house’s boarded windows and doors. If things get ugly, he knows he can escape. Harry, a family man whose wife and wounded daughter wait below, believes this to be madness. “You’re insane! The cellar’s the safest place!” he cries. “The cellar’s a deathtrap,” retorts Ben.

Atom Zombie Smasher
Atom Zombie Smasher's opening vignette sets the game's dark-humor tone.


This scene from George Romero’s 1968 film Night of the Living Dead embodies the qualities of an engaging narrative. The external threat, zombies, is not the focal point here; rather, the clash between Ben and Harry demands our attention. Should the group retreat to the relative safety of the basement but risk becoming trapped, or should they leave their options open by staying on the first floor? Not only is this intragroup conflict interesting, but it mimics the type of choice that strategy gamers contend with every match.

Blendo Games’ Atom Zombie Smasher and Headup Games’ Trapped Dead (available on PC) both allow tactical decisions (i.e., gameplay) to shape narrative. Atom Zombie Smasher charges the player with commanding a withered military to rescue groups of people and hold back the tide of reanimated corpses while Trapped Dead offers a series of open-ended missions bound together with a regrettably forgettable story. Where one succeeds, the other stumbles.

 

Like those who took shelter in a Pennsylvanian farmhouse, the larger situation in Atom Zombie Smasher is outside of your control. You’ll never know ahead of time which units (infantry, snipers, artillery, landmines, remote-detonated explosives, and barricades) will be available for each in-game day. Thus, each extraction attempt forces you to make difficult decisions with limited resources about who to rescue and sacrifice.

Trapped Dead
Trapped Dead evokes an encroaching death well during the tactical portion of the game.


Games critic Tom Chick observed that these decisions elicit “moments of drama.” You’ll sigh with despair when you hear a chorus of muffled groans erupt from your speakers because a lone purple dot, which represents the undead, makes contact with a tightly packed group of yellow dots, survivors, waiting below a slowly descending rescue helicopter. You had diverted your infantry away from guarding the landing zone toward a large cadre of approaching corpses. Should you have risked shelling that street with artillery fire instead?

Trapped Dead takes you from Atom Zombie Smasher’s bird’s-eye view and brings you down to the street level. Rather than direct soldiers to save the lives of a city’s residents, you instead lead a small team of civilians across zombie-plagued concrete jungle.

The primary decision players must contend with is how to maneuver their parties through the undead-infested locales. Hand-to-hand combat is silent, but you risk becoming overwhelmed. Firearms are safer, but they attract attention. The longer path could result in fewer confrontations, but you may end up cornered. By contrast, the shorter route is likely much more dangerous.

Atom Zombie Smasher
Although abstracted, you'll care more about survivors in Atom Zombie Smasher.


Further choice comes from conversation between characters in a bunker that you’ll visit before and after every mission. You’ll decide whether to put your team in further jeopardy for long-term benefits (by searching for additional survivors and supplies) or pursue a faster escape from the recently reanimated.

In both games, player-initiated narrative derives directly from gameplay; unfortunately, Trapped Dead falters by adhering to uncreative and archaic states of failure. When a team member dies, you get a dreaded game-over screen. That adrenaline rush through rotting corpses where your party narrowly evaded certain death? Erased, and you're sent back to a save location. Yes, save locations. Like Final Fantasy.

Atom Zombie Smasher allows you to concede districts where the horde overran your operations (and really, anyone not playing in Permadeath mode is clearly doing it wrong). Whatever happened becomes a part of the permanent record -- and I do mean that literally, as you're allowed to export a text file describing major events at the game's conclusion. Even with Atom Zombie Smasher's oddball vignettes, the narrative primarily comes from your tactical decisions in the field.

Trapped Dead
If anyone dies, you'll have to play through this sequence again and again....


And that's the glaring difference between both titles: Atom Zombie Smasher uses the medium's unique attribute, interactivity, to shape the story. Trapped Dead instead revels in stilted dialogue and cliché plot devices. (A virus caused the zombie outbreak? You don’t say.)


When Ben's and Tom's plan to refuel the truck goes awry (which results in both Tom's and Judy's deaths), Night of the Living Dead keeps going. Could you imagine the film suddenly coming to a stop, rewinding 15 minutes or so, and then projecting a slightly different sequence of scenes that concludes with a positive outcome? Strange, right? But that's exactly the type of story-breaking bullshit we put up with in video games.

Trapped Dead clearly wants to tell a tale -- Headup has implemented a narrative-driven mission structure a lot like Fallout Tactics did 10 years ago. But the game is too focused on expressing its story rather than letting you write your own. Since this is a strategy game, I'm doubly disappointed, as this is one of the easier genres to embrace gameplay as a storytelling device. Just ask Atom Zombie Smasher.

 
Problem? Report this post
ROB SAVILLO'S SPONSOR
Comments (8)
Default_picture
March 18, 2011

Great article, Rob! 

Atom Zombie Smasher sounds like the kind of game I wish was more common every time I die several times in a row playing a game like Red Dead Redemtion. When that happens, all sense urgency and the need to be careful and think everything through are removed. Tthis wasn't as much of a problem in the days when story wasn't such a huge part of games, but as games become more dependent on the story to motivate the player, I think making decisions, mistakes, and just plain carelessness more permanent has the potential to make the story much more engaging. 

Also, as an example, I don't think implementing permadeath the way Fire Emblem does is really the way to go, as the player never really sees the impact it has on the story, and it really just feels like a tactical decision (or mistake, as is often the case), rather than a way to alter the story. Not to mention I've never really cared much about the characters in those games. Also, when your main character dies, you get the usual game over and you just restart the battle. I want to see the implications of that death play out in a story that I care about.

I don't really want to see the static story disappear from gaming, as I still enjoy what amounts to a movie with large amounts of gameplay sandwhiched between scenes. But I'd definitely like to see more games where story changes with gameplay decisions. That said, I'm downloading the demo for Atom Zombie Smasher now.

Download
March 18, 2011

I think the element of death - especially in the context of zombie games - is handled really poorly. As you point out, it ruins the tension and acts as a safety net. In another way, it's also a sign that players are not fully immersed because dying isn't considered to be a big thing.

Anyway, you got me interested in Zombie Smasher so I'm going to check it out.

Default_picture
March 20, 2011

Hmm... I'm going to have to try this Zombie Smasher game.

Robsavillo
March 21, 2011

Tristan, I'm not too familiar with Fire Emblem, as the story-driven tactical game has almost always eluded me (save for Fallout Tactics, but I think that's just because I really enjoyed the first two Fallout games). Sounds like a missed opportunity to allow character deaths to shape narrative, though.

In some ways, I think I do want to see the static story disappear from gaming (at the very least for the strategy genre) because I don't think it leverages the uniqueness of the medium in any way. I can only think of one developer who recently and sucessfully tied a static story to gameplay: From Software with Demon's Souls. And it works here because they reinvented the death mechanic to be not only integral to the narrative but also seamlessly woven into the basic game design.

Richard, I agree completely. I want to see developers use death as more than just a fail state. As you point out, there's much potential yet to be realized.

I hope everyone who tries out Atom Zombie Smasher enjoys the game! It's already on my top-ten list for 2011.

Shoe_headshot_-_square
March 23, 2011

Zombie Smasher is a lot of fun. I highly recommend it!

Bitmob_photo
May 18, 2011

My friends implemented a pen and paper zombie RPG where their characters usually die. If they survive a session, then they level up, but will probably die in the next one. Everyone who dies has to create a new character for the next session. Even if characters die, new ones come and the story moves forward regardless of their deaths. I'd really like to see something like that in video game form. I think it has the potential for more realistic and more interesting narratives. 

Robsavillo
May 18, 2011

Chris, try Rogue Survivor. It's a near carbon copy of your pen 'n' paper game: a roguelike set in a zombie apocalypse, and you only level up after surviving each night. If your character dies, you can "reincarnate" as another survivor in your existing game world! Very cool little indie project.

Also, DoubleBear's upcoming Dead State might satisfy as well.

Bitmob_photo
May 18, 2011

That sounds freaking awesome! I'll check those out and get back to you!

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.