Thursday, November 29, 2012
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom
Rus McLaughlin
I disagree with McGrath's conclusions, but he presents an interesting argument. A fully interactive medium like video games might just need a new kind of fully intereractive storytelling ... but does that really mean things like SimCity and Minecraft represent the apex of game narratives?
For his keynote speech at Gamercamp in Toronto, game developer Shawn McGrath gave the floor to his Twitter followers, who overwhelmingly asked about the technology that went into his psychedelic abstract shooter Dyad for the PlayStation 3. But time ran out before he could circle back to the topic he really wanted to tackle: how storylines in video games are "a worthless endeavour."
That's an especially controversial thesis considering that many of the discussions at Gamercamp centered about elevating narratives in games.
I spoke with McGrath after his talk, and it became clear that his potentially controversial take was really an outright rebuttal. McGrath doesn't believe traditional narratives have any place in gaming.
Jonathan Ore: You mentioned that linear narratives aren’t exactly your thing. Could you talk about that?
Shawn McGrath: I think linear story and interactive anything are completely diametrically opposed. They make no sense together at all, and any attempt to put storylines in games in any traditional sense is completely idiotic.
Mass Effect attempted it, and people praise it. It’s horrible. It’s horrible because the choices that you make are so meaningless. People say, “Oh, but it’s getting to a point where the whole galaxy is going to change based on your decisions,” and I say, no, that’s impossible. That’s an NP-hard problem. That’s a computer science problem where the problem is not computable. So attempting that is a worthless endeavor. Games are really fucking awesome. We can tell stories through entirely interactive ways instead, with no text.
Read more >>