Can't explain something to player?

[Lord Vectra 414]

Have you ever ran into that problem, where something is the way it is, but you have no way of explaining why it's like that?

 

For example, why do heroes in games keep putting artifacts in dungeons when they always get defeated? Why not bury it in a random place and just remember where it's at? Why not put it in the bottom of the ocean? Just saying, there is better places than a dungeon when your rival keeps coming in, defeating you, nearly kills you, takes the artifact, runs away with it, you go, kill/defeat him, take it back, the story repeats again.

Why? No one knows.

 

Not that it's a bad thing. I guess if you're making a sequel, sometimes, the characters gotta be a lil stupid so there can be another game. Well, I wouldn't say stupid but have them make obvious mistakes or otherwise, known as rookie mistakes.

 

Like Diablo, they don't know when to stop putting the black stone or any artifact in dungeons. Dungeons isn't their friend even though they try to make it their friend. Just saying, you'll think at a certain point, they'll stop putting them in dungeons. Now, I've never played DIablo, this is what I heard about it on the Diablo Reaper of Souls trailer on youtube.

 

My question is...

Does the player have to know why something is the way it is?

[magic2345 252]

That depends on the thing, if it feels really out of place, the player might (and probably will) wonder why. If there's no explanation, and the thing is pretty important, usually people will deem it as a plothole.

 

Now, for the artifacts in dungeons thing. The word "dungeon" usually means labyrinth-like, and guarded. So, that's probably why. If they did bury it randomly or stash it somewhere, well, that depends on the setting. If it's magical, wouldn't there be some sort of magic that can locate the artifacts? Or, if it isn't magical, wouldn't it be bad if some random person accidentally found it? Also, if he did put it at the bottom of the ocean, that would make it hard for him (or anyone) to later find it. Or, it could be that he is forced to hide it in dungeons, because other places are too far away, or he has an ulterior motive.

 

Actually, the reasons are infinite, really.

[+ Chaosian 617]

I don't think so.

Audiences are pretty forgiving of tropes, especially fantasy ones, and will go to some outstanding lengths to justify the odd, explainable things that happen in games if they are enjoying their ramifications. I would hope though that a fan never has to cover for my thoughtlessness and poor judgment. Maybe it's also part of my design philosophy, but if something can't be contextualized within the game universe, or serves the tone in no way, then it has no place in the universe. That's just bad world building. If you, as a designer, have an idea to have magic items in dungeons, then it's up to you to think of a reason why they're there in the first place - if you can't, don't put magic items in dungeons.

[Kayzee 4,032]

If you got a GOOD explanation that makes SENSE, go for it. Otherwise don't bother. Though really if you can't come up with a good explanation for something I would say either you need to research it more or the thing should be questioned.

 

Also:

 

Why did they keep putting a artifact in dungeons? Are you serious? We obviously you can't just bury it just any old place, because it gives out magical energy that can be easily tracked, or maybe it can be easily tracked or even summoned unless kept in a special chamber. Haven't you read The Lord of the Rings? Don't you think dumping it in the sea or hiding it was the first idea they came up with? They quickly concluded it was a bad bad idea. You can't just dump a magical artifact of untold power and expect it to lie quietly! Someone will find it eventuality.

 

And maybe it can't simply be destroyed because it has too much magical energy bound in it and it would release all the energy at once and bad things would start to happen. Heck even the One Ring caused a massive eruption and earthquakes. You ever witness a huge large scale magical explosion? It's like a nuke, it leaves wild magical energy that can pollute the land for years! And if it was a doomsday artifact, well, if it has enough power to destroy the world or something do you reaaally want all that power uncontrollably exploding everywhere? It might doom the world even worse then if it was used! And probably open a hole to another dimension where eldritch things dwell! Is that what you want to see?

 

Come on man think about it. What the heck else are you gonna do? Of course I guess you could just encase the dungeon in solid concrete or something, but even that could just be mined through with a determined enough person. Maybe it's better to be able to let heroes come in and take it somewhere else if need be. And at least if you have a path to the artifact the villain will be less likely to try and blast their way right to it.

 

Super-powered magical shit be like nuclear waste yo. You do not leave them laying around. Putting them in dungeons is the only sensible thing to do!

Edited September 1, 2015 by KilloZapit

[EpicFILE 200]

I've run into that problem in the past. I made a comic with that kind of story (hiding some powerful thing in the dungeon).

5 books done (average 30 pages each), hitting the 6th, I'm stuck. It feels doesn't make any sense. xD

Though I'm sure such story can be done nicely if there's a clear concept as a base.

[lonequeso 1,921]

Killozapit, your insights never cease to make me smile. You went all in there.

 

The great things about video games- really any medium you tell a story in is creative license. Not every single detail requires an explanation. Why do coins magically float in mid air? Why does Mario grow giant when eating mushrooms? Why do guns and ammo float in mid air? How does just touching a health pack instantly fully heal your character? Because it does. You can imagine all sorts of fun explanations after the fact (especially with the mushrooms), but why you're playing, do you really stop and question it? Do you write a letter to Nintendo demanding to know the physics of floating coins? Killozapit might  , but most people just take it as is. 

 

Whether or not something needs an explanation has a lot to do with the type of game you're making and the audience you're trying to reach. If you're making a fantasy game for preteens and under, you don't need much explaining. If you're going for

super realism for a more adult audience, a lot more needs to be explained. a lot of it comes down to you're own discretion while your developing your game. Say there's some treasure or key item hidden in a dungeon. When you're going through the level and feel like the rationale behind having that item there doesn't make sense, add some story to make it so. You don't have to 

super in-depth and explain the entire history of the item and all the past struggles over it. Sometimes just a couple lines of dialogue can provide enough exposition that the player thinks "Okay, that makes sense." Now, if that item is the core of the story, one of the main goals of the hero or villain is trying to achieve, you want to provide a detailed explanation of why that item is so important and why it's hidden where it is.

 

Generally the more important an element in the story is, more detail is required. Personally, I don't worry too much about more minor details. For example, last night I was adding a minor side quest. Simple quest, kill some giant tortoises outside the city and collect the shells. Bring the shells to back to the NPC. I don't want that convo to be "Hey, random strangers? Can you go kill some tortoises for me and bring me the shells?"  "Sure! We'd love to slaughter some tortoises for you!" (Now that I typed that, I am very tempted to make a quest like that. Yeah, that's happening   ) But I digress. I also don't want to write 3 pages of dialogue explaining why it's so important to get those shells. I did add a little extra detail just for entertainment value. (Admittedly, for my entertainment.) In a nutshell, the NPC's job entails making tools, armor, etc. from the tortoise shells. He was injured on his last run, and needs someone to get them for him. Right there is all the exposition that's necessary. It provides the player with enough of a reason that they don't question why they are killing tortoises for a stranger they just met.

 

When I'm explaining things that are key to the story i.e. the main conflict, I explain things a lot more thoroughly in order to convey the gravity and tone to the player.

 

I kinda rambled there so I hope it makes as much sense as I think it does in my highly caffeinated state.

[Kayzee 4,032]

There is a difference between questions about the world that actually deserve answers and obvious gaming abstractions though. You don't need to ask why guns and ammo float in the air or why health packs instantly heal you because it's a gaming abstraction (didn't stop Yahtzee from trying with some things here and here though). You can reasonably expect that in the fictional universe of the game, guns and ammo don't actually float and people probably don't have a actually simple health meter that works in the way the game portrays it to. These are pure gameplay abstractions of complicated things and thus don't need to be explained in-universe. Maybe it would be clever to do so, but it isn't necessary.

 

How can how healthy someone is be boiled down to some number of points? How can people get teleported to some mystical battle field when they encounter an enemy? It makes no physical sense, but that's okay because they are only vague abstractions of what is "really" going on. It's certainly possible to go to far and have something that is so abstract that the players can't figure out what it really means. Like in Final Fantasy 8 where you could "junction" spells to your stats. What the heck does that actually mean? You have no idea. The game certainly doesn't tell you. On the other hand, Final Fantasy 7 at least attempted to explain how Materia worked and I thought it was amazing for taking the effort to do so. Sure, maybe it wasn't the most clear about how the physics of magic worked, but it was all sort of fit together. There was one supernatural mystical element to the world, the lifestream, that was the source of everything magical, and it made sense in a metaphysical way. You didn't need to explain everything about it or make if fully realistic.

 

We also have gaming universes like Mario's which are almost run by pure gaming abstraction, and that's okay too! Mario's universe was always intended to be surreal and dream like. In fact it was partly based on the universe of Alice in Wonderland. There is no need to ask questions about floating coins and magic mushrooms because obviously we aren't operating with the laws of physics as we know it. It's a surrealist world and understanding it by the same rules as a realistic one is doomed to failure. We can still turn to symbolism and metaphysical postmodern stuff if we really feel the need to analyze worlds like that of course, but that feels sort of disingenuous sometimes and goes over most peoples heads anyway.

 

But plot holes are still plot holes. You don't need to explain everything about gameplay abstractions or have every single thing in your world make physical sense. But plot questions you DO have to at least put in a token effort to explain. No question. If the player is confused as to why they are running around doing what they are doing, or can't stop having a nagging question like "why can't they just do this?" then the writing has failed in some way. And most people's writing fails at some point, so you can hardly be blamed for one or two minor mistakes. But that dosn't mean you can afford to be lazy and not put in the effort and do the research. If you really can't come up with a reason why the plot should unfold the way you want it too, it should be taken as a sign that the plot doesn't "want" to go in that direction and you should rethink it.

Edited September 1, 2015 by KilloZapit

[lonequeso 1,921]

 

 

But that dosn't mean you can afford to be lazy and not put in the effort and do the research.

 That's my least favorite thing about writing. Usually, I can get away with it. Now that there's the Google, and the interweb it's at least a lot easier. I don't think I'd enjoy writing a historically accurate story. As far as my rambling first couple paragraphs, most of that was a lethal combination of caffeine and boredom.  The point I trying to make was pretty much what you said. Your reply translated into English for everyone. Now you're my LSD and my dictionary 

[Kayzee 4,032]

Maybe I should just be your brain eh? Just let me control your body so you don't need to do that pesky thinking that you say I am so much better at?

 

Kidding of course... though that might be fun...

 

You flatter me... I am sure you could have explained it just as well yourself if you had waited and collected your thoughts!

[xoferew 261]

Players want stuff to make sense but players also want to get on with the fun efficiently and are willing to sacrifice realism for that.  Sure phoenix downs are silly but I don't want to be dead, so I'll just gulp it down my deceased throat and not ask questions. 

 

Just be consistent with the reality level.  If you have the chara rummage thru treasure chests in NPC houses with no consequences, don't suddenly decide to call it stealing and have NPCs mad.  If you pick up chicken legs off the ground for HP, don't suddenly have the chara come down with salmonella. 

 

But why is the bad guy bad?  Why are you on this epic quest?  Yeah, there better be a well-thought out and explained reason for that. 

[+ CVincent 234]

I think a lot of people are already discussing something called suspension of disbelief. We allow some things to go unexplained because they add a level of depth or visual attraction. It could be argued that this is accepted in games that use armor cosmetically as opposed to being the most functional.

 

It's good to have lore or history to back up important questions that the player may ask when playing your game such as what would be the same in writing a book. Character history, the event and why it's happening, what era or fictional time and where in real or made up place are all important things to be explained first and foremost.

 

Back to the point about the artifacts being placed in dungeons -- what functionality do these dungeons serve? If you want to give more depth to a location in your game then go for it, you will gain story from having more developed ideas. The dungeon could have perhaps been a resting place for an ancient lord and his prized relics in which if disturbed would invoke the lord to rise from his death. This would be a little more interesting than simply having a dungeon and a boss battle because it now has some form of history and clear consequence.

 

On that note a player should be aware of consequence, failure, success and outcome. There's nothing wrong with surprising a player but it may be better to add tension by placing the player in a position with all the facts and potential outcomes thereafter. You can build a scene to be much more believable by describing it as best to the player as you can.

 

This has to do with suspension of disbelief because of gameplay and style. If you want to have a more mystical and fantasy-esque type of game then using this concept can be beneficial to build your scene into something much more gripping and interesting to a player. It all depends on how you want your game to feel.

 

It's also important to understand that sometimes a developer will need to use suspension of disbelief to work around technical issues that can not be overcame easily. Things like physics optimization may be an issue for a developer so instead of letting a weapon fall on the ground they may opt to let it float in the air. In fast paced action games you may notice that it's sometimes hard to see or a grab a weapon that's on the ground, having it made possible to interact with an object in different ways will change the way a game is played and how it feels to play that game.

 

Many games now play on realistic aspects because it is easier for developers to add depth to a world using the tools they have. The RPG Maker VX-Ace engine may be limited in many aspects but we are able to use our own suspension of disbelief to create a more understandable environment. Things such as a game having a day/night and time cycle aren't really necessary but adds a sense of something that can be believed while on the other side of things you could simply just choose when the player sees day and night without the use of real time.

 

Does the player have to know why something is the way it is?

 

With all of what I mentioned in mind it is easily understood that everything is circumstantial and all options should be taken into consideration when developing a game. If everything is consistently intentional then the project will follow your vision more clearly rather than by simply adding content for arbitrary reasons. A player is able to understand suspension of disbelief, just make sure there is a proper reason for using it.

Edited September 4, 2015 by CVincent

[Mysticphoenix 8]

I hate to explain everything single in the game, why is blood here? Whose blood is this? Oh man, it's just a blood... Do you want me to tell you which bloody type is it too?

 

Why is a barricade here? Why can't he just jump over the fence and wander? Do I have to let your character be able to jump across the fence and find jobs, get married, and growing old too?

 

But if it's necessary to the story, I explain. But not "whose looting house is this?" questions.

[Kayzee 4,032]

What is necessary to the story though? You don't need to explain every little detail of the world, but if the players find a pool of blood somewhere in the middle of a happy little village they are going to wonder why it's there. If the players see an obvious path that has been artificially blocked off by a fence post they are going to wonder why they can't climb over it. There are design details that fit an environment and don't need to be explained, and details that stand out and do need to. If you are regularly getting frustrated by people that ask what you think are dumb questions about random details, might I suggest that maybe sprinkling in random details without thinking about how they fit in to your design is the problem.

[devonm0 37]

Mysticphoenix, I have to disagree.  Story elements are not the only things worth explaining.  If something looks out of place to someone who has never played your game before, then It would be a good idea to explain it to the point that it no longer looks out of place.  There's no need to make 4-5 text boxes to explain why there's a fence post in the middle of a path, but the developer should at least care enough to give the player some degree of explanation as to why that is, unless it's clear that it in fact isn't a barricade that's worth worrying about.  As a developer, one of your jobs is to create minimal potential for players to ask unanswered questions with important answers.  As for what makes the answer to a given question important?  That is something that depends on your audience, but you can't get mad at your audience for asking questions, even if they sound dumb.  What sounds dumb to one person may not actually be dumb.  It depends on how you look at it.  If you have blood spatter textures in a cheery town as remnants from its time in your design stages as a camp for an insane cult, that might just be a simple mistake, but would you get mad at people for bringing it up and asking where the culprit is?  I should hope not.  It would be a simple mistake on the part of the developer.

 

Okay ,I'm done.

[xoferew 261]

Regarding a barricade, players have been conditioned to think that a barricade that doesn't look permanent is just temporary and later in the game it will be removed or they will find an item to destroy it etc.  So if it remains till the end of the game they may think they missed something.  Also it's kind of like advertising your game as bigger then it actually turns out to be.  "Oh, the closed casino was just for show, it never actually opens and allows me to gamble away all my G.  Ha ha, good one, game making person, you got me!" 

 

You don't have to explain every last thing if they player can assume they know, or make a good guess without too much effort.  If your town is overrun with zombies and rabid dogs, you can skip explaining the pools of blood.  

 

And you don't  have to explain game conventions that are not realistic but clearly to the benefit of the player.  Sure a chicken is about the same size as a cow and a book is about the same size as a person.  So we can actually see everything with some detail.  Sure I can carry about 900 pounds of items around with me.  Because I don't want to die. 

[lonequeso 1,921]

 

I hate to explain everything single in the game, why is blood here? Whose blood is this? Oh man, it's just a blood... Do you want me to tell you which bloody type is it too?

 

Why is a barricade here? Why can't he just jump over the fence and wander? Do I have to let your character be able to jump across the fence and find jobs, get married, and growing old too?

 

But if it's necessary to the story, I explain. But not "whose looting house is this?" questions.

 

 

I just pictured a hero with OCD who not only questions why the blood is there, but is compelled to clean it. That'd be a really weird game. Anyway, you don't have to explain every little detail. The more important something is, the more you want to explain it. Like if the blood is in the house of a friend of the protagonist, and the friend is missing, you'd want to protagonist to react in some way. You don't need to write a novel about the blood, but the protag should show some concern about it.

[+ CVincent 234]

Sometimes having questions not asked nor answered can add a sense of ambiguity if done in a way that makes the player think about what they're doing without mentioning too many details. As lonequeso mentioned that he pictured a hero with OCD who not only questions why the blood is there and is compelled to clean it could indeed by an impulse granted to the player by the developer.

 

For example, Viscera Cleanup Detail has a LOT of unexplained details that build its atmosphere, but it's the player's job as the 'janitor' to clean things up. If you start to put things together you may end up fabricating your own story. The key is that you're only given a few details beforehand. The game kind of leaves you to your thoughts while you play and doesn't overload you with information.

 

It's kind of interesting to play on the idea of things that aren't explained to the player can be used from a creative gameplay standpoint.

[Kayzee 4,032]

Well yeah, that's another example of details that fit the environment or the story. If you are given a plausible reason for why there should be blood everywhere, then you don't need to explain every little detail of them, as long as they fit together. You can even "explain" things without explicit exposition sometimes, as long as the details actually make sense and you have all the clues needed to get a bigger picture. It's not necessary to sit there and point out every little thing. It is necessary though for nothing to stand out as a glaring inconsistency that is never explained (it could be explained later).

 

I think that's the important thing to note, it's all about consistency. The more inconsistent things are to what people expect, the more you are going to have to stop and explain things. Explaining everything all the time can be tedious and time consuming, but if you want to do things that the player is likely not going to be able to expect or understand, you kinda need to. There is something to be said for just throwing the player in the deep end and expecting them to figure stuff out on there own of course, but you need to make sure they can figure it out. You need to sit down and see if you can explain it to at least yourself first, because if you can't, that probably means there is a plothole somewhere that needs fixing.

Edited September 9, 2015 by KilloZapit

[lonequeso 1,921]

One thing that does annoy me is if you can interact with an object like the blood and you get a line of text like this: It's a pool of blood. Really? I thought it was Koolaid. Good thing I read what it was. I've played several game like that. It feels condescending. Like the developer thinks the players are too stupid to figure out it's blood just by looking at it. 

[xoferew 261]

I know!  At least say, "It's a cooled pool of blood, coagulated and scabby around the edges, but you can still splash through the middle of it!"  and have a gloppy splashing sound effect.  Or maybe, "It's yours!"  Then your chara is like, "Oh my goodness I didn't realize I'd been stabbed through the pancreas with a broadsword, guess I'm dead!"  and game over.   That would teach you to interact with stuff in a game! 

[Adventurer_inc. 9]

Sometimes something is the way it is just because it is that way. You'll find this in quite a few games.

 

It's usually has to do with magic also. Magic exist because magic exist in that universe. End of explanation. "Now, go get my 5 elemental gems from the 5 elemental dungeons."

[lonequeso 1,921]

Trying to scientifically explain magic doesn't work too well. If you can actually pull that off, kudos! I think it would take the fun out of having magic if you did. 

 

How many times have you played a game where your progress was blocked by an invisible wall or a barricade that the player could easily climb over? Sometimes these things are necessary to keep the player from progressing through the story out of order.

I still wanna climb over the damn barricade though 

[Kayzee 4,032]

Just because you can't necessarily scientifically explain magic doesn't mean you can't explain it in other ways! I am big on metaphysics and philosophy, so I like to try and explain magic though that. For example, seeing magic as anti-reality or as manipulation of forms imposed on chaotic mater. If you actually think about it, magical thinking does have a sort of logic to it, it's not all making stuff up randomly. Look at the Persona games or example and how just about everything that happens is rooted in Jungian psychology. Even if it doesn't make very much sense in real world terms to imagine a hidden world filled with repressed shadows, in a weird way it still does if you look at it from another angle. Another example is the Discworld series, where storytelling tropes become metaphysical fact. A lot of magic can be explained through symbolism and Jungian ideas, or simply having a world with a different metaphysical foundation then the real world.

 

If you really wanted to get scientific you could always say that magic has something to do with quantum wave function collapse somehow. I thought of a weird explanation for magic a little while ago that had vaguely to do with Quantum Immortality in a way... What if, given the many worlds interpretation is true, magic does not in fact change anything but just sort of moves a person's consciousness to one of the infinite possible worlds where, due to random quantum effects, the desired effects just randomly happened? Or else if it's not true, it causes the desired outcome to be favored more? Of course it's a little silly, and I prefer the idea of magic as a metaphysical foundation of a fictional world more anyway.

Edited September 13, 2015 by KilloZapit

[lonequeso 1,921]

Yes you could explain how magic works. However I'm.... crap what's the word I'm looking for.... uh.... um.... Lazy! That's it!

I'm lazy. What you described would require research. I don't like research. But that's just me. Besides I'll never finish my game if I elaborate that much

on everything. Magic requires mental energy; Chi requires physical. That's about as deep as I went with it.

 

Not that explaining how magic works is a bad thing. I love how Dragon Age did it. They even made mages into a social class. I wanna be an apostate....

[Lord Vectra 414]

Yes you could explain how magic works. However I'm.... crap what's the word I'm looking for.... uh.... um.... Lazy! That's it!

I'm lazy. What you described would require research. I don't like research. But that's just me. Besides I'll never finish my game if I elaborate that much

on everything. Magic requires mental energy; Chi requires physical. That's about as deep as I went with it.

 

Not that explaining how magic works is a bad thing. I love how Dragon Age did it. They even made mages into a social class. I wanna be an apostate....

In that game, I'm the apostate(DA2) or I'm a mage that helped a blood mage and doesn't care that he did help a blood mage, but then later, uses the blood mage class(DAO) lol