Emotions & Games
by Jeremy Alessi · 04/03/2006 (12:43 am) · 27 comments
There's always been this notion that eventually some great game designer will create a game which causes players around the world to cry in a similar manner to movies. I've given this thought ... and initially I really subscribed to this thought process. If games are art, shouldn't they be capable of evoking this sort of emotion? I've decided that this is utter BS.
Games are art because anything can be an art. Art doesn't have to make you cry. Furthermore I don't think a game will ever make someone cry in the sense most designers speculate (like a movie or a book) ... unless it's because the controls are so horrendous that the player cannot beat the game ... and in fact I'm sure this has been accomplished many times already. There's also always those MMO stories where some poor sap played the game for a million hours and then lost their account ... but that's not really part of the game design.
Crying at a movie or a book ... is an emotion evoked do to a lack of control. Something bad happens which cannot be changed and that severance brings the tears. Games are a medium in which the primary goal is control. When a game is seemingly out of control ... we don't like it and it's considered a bad game.
Games are about feeling good and giving people unlimited chances to get things right. You can always have another go and win the next time. Crying is all about not having a choice ... when you've messed up and there's nothing you can do to change it or just in general something is out of your control. Now, some RPG might make you cry because of its story ... but really that's not a game it's a story making you cry like a movie or a book. Games sometimes include stories but it's not the game making you cry it's the story. So in a Zelda or Final Fantasy the game happens when you're battling beasties or pushing blocks around ... and the story is the cut scenes, etc...
I think if an actual game does make you cry that it's got to be on the other end of the spectrum ... when you're so happy and thankful for something that you cry. That's not the context most designers seem to aim for but I think that's got to be the only way. I've been extremely happy at times playing games ... and I've never cried over it but I could see how I might if the game could bring me to feel some amazing level of satisfaction. Games make me feel accomplished ... and if that accomplishment brings me to a new level of understanding then maybe I'll cry.
If a game comes along that can make people cry in droves it's not going to be in the traditional sense due to loss of control. Whatever it is I'm sure it'll have more to do with accomplishment than loss. Perhaps it'll be a new wave of dementia fighting games that really help cure the ails of mental acuity loss. Bottom line, it's going to be it's own new paradigm.
Games are art because anything can be an art. Art doesn't have to make you cry. Furthermore I don't think a game will ever make someone cry in the sense most designers speculate (like a movie or a book) ... unless it's because the controls are so horrendous that the player cannot beat the game ... and in fact I'm sure this has been accomplished many times already. There's also always those MMO stories where some poor sap played the game for a million hours and then lost their account ... but that's not really part of the game design.
Crying at a movie or a book ... is an emotion evoked do to a lack of control. Something bad happens which cannot be changed and that severance brings the tears. Games are a medium in which the primary goal is control. When a game is seemingly out of control ... we don't like it and it's considered a bad game.
Games are about feeling good and giving people unlimited chances to get things right. You can always have another go and win the next time. Crying is all about not having a choice ... when you've messed up and there's nothing you can do to change it or just in general something is out of your control. Now, some RPG might make you cry because of its story ... but really that's not a game it's a story making you cry like a movie or a book. Games sometimes include stories but it's not the game making you cry it's the story. So in a Zelda or Final Fantasy the game happens when you're battling beasties or pushing blocks around ... and the story is the cut scenes, etc...
I think if an actual game does make you cry that it's got to be on the other end of the spectrum ... when you're so happy and thankful for something that you cry. That's not the context most designers seem to aim for but I think that's got to be the only way. I've been extremely happy at times playing games ... and I've never cried over it but I could see how I might if the game could bring me to feel some amazing level of satisfaction. Games make me feel accomplished ... and if that accomplishment brings me to a new level of understanding then maybe I'll cry.
If a game comes along that can make people cry in droves it's not going to be in the traditional sense due to loss of control. Whatever it is I'm sure it'll have more to do with accomplishment than loss. Perhaps it'll be a new wave of dementia fighting games that really help cure the ails of mental acuity loss. Bottom line, it's going to be it's own new paradigm.
About the author
#22
04/03/2006 (12:44 pm)
With Half-Life I just appreciated the fact that I could run around and do what I wanted while the characters are talking etc... It was very much more like being in a real room full of people. Sure it wasn't super dynamic ... but I was still in control of my character while the other stuff was going on ... it was an improvement in my opinion on the cut scene where the camera roves where it wants to ... and I as a player and taken out of control of my character.
#23
Interesting comments. The smell thing was abit of a joke. Though a telling joke. Can you imagine the impact that saving private ryan would have if you could smell the smells? That's a whole other experience to smell the smell of death. The things is, we do react emotionally to what we sense, that's the way humans work. The sight of blood does evoke and emotional reaction. The sound of a baby cry does make you feel something.
People do get emotionally involved in the characters they play and play with in games already. You might not, but a large portion of gamers do. It's really not about losing something to get emotional about a pet dying in a game. Jeff's son was emotionally attached to the pet. Just like being attached to a real pet. Probably not as strong a bond as a real pet, but I think as real of a bond. If you ever had a sister with dolls you would understand how true this is. This is for real. People do bond with characters in stories and that includes games. Yes, it does require 'forgetting' that the characters aren't real, but it happens every day.
Take Doom 3 for example. That game was scary for me to play the first time. Not because I was afraid of losing. I was afraid of the demons from hell because I was immersed in the game. I had to put on God mode and keep reminding myself it was a game and I still had nightmares about it that night. So did both of my brothers. I laugh about it playing the game now, but it was real. And... you know the beginning when the scientist is telling you he made hells cage and then all hell breaks lose and he gets possessed. I had an idea that he might get possessed and so I shot him before it happened. And do you know what? I felt really bad for it and I apoligized to him outloud for having to kill him. I actually said something like "dude, I'm sorry, but I'm putting you out of your misery cause you don't want to be possessed alive." I made fun of myself afterwards, but, it happened. Funny enough, I watched the movie and I didn't give a shit about anyone in it.
Another example is... now you are going to roll your eyes at this... Unreal 2:The Awakening. There is a part where you are under siege and you are responsible for directing the soldiers to protect the scientist. Well, I didn't want to send anyone to their deaths so I made them all guard the scientist while I went out and kicked ass. I really didn't want to be responsible in that moment for sending someone to their end. This sounds goofy, but it's the same thing we all do everytime we watch a movie or read a book and think 'no, don't go that way' or 'oh no, don't do that'. It's how we are wired.
I think that just like books and movies that some stories and some characters connect with some people and not others and that's just how it is for many complicated reasons. So, I really do think that games already emotionally connect with players. It just depends on the game and the player.
04/03/2006 (12:52 pm)
@RubesInteresting comments. The smell thing was abit of a joke. Though a telling joke. Can you imagine the impact that saving private ryan would have if you could smell the smells? That's a whole other experience to smell the smell of death. The things is, we do react emotionally to what we sense, that's the way humans work. The sight of blood does evoke and emotional reaction. The sound of a baby cry does make you feel something.
People do get emotionally involved in the characters they play and play with in games already. You might not, but a large portion of gamers do. It's really not about losing something to get emotional about a pet dying in a game. Jeff's son was emotionally attached to the pet. Just like being attached to a real pet. Probably not as strong a bond as a real pet, but I think as real of a bond. If you ever had a sister with dolls you would understand how true this is. This is for real. People do bond with characters in stories and that includes games. Yes, it does require 'forgetting' that the characters aren't real, but it happens every day.
Take Doom 3 for example. That game was scary for me to play the first time. Not because I was afraid of losing. I was afraid of the demons from hell because I was immersed in the game. I had to put on God mode and keep reminding myself it was a game and I still had nightmares about it that night. So did both of my brothers. I laugh about it playing the game now, but it was real. And... you know the beginning when the scientist is telling you he made hells cage and then all hell breaks lose and he gets possessed. I had an idea that he might get possessed and so I shot him before it happened. And do you know what? I felt really bad for it and I apoligized to him outloud for having to kill him. I actually said something like "dude, I'm sorry, but I'm putting you out of your misery cause you don't want to be possessed alive." I made fun of myself afterwards, but, it happened. Funny enough, I watched the movie and I didn't give a shit about anyone in it.
Another example is... now you are going to roll your eyes at this... Unreal 2:The Awakening. There is a part where you are under siege and you are responsible for directing the soldiers to protect the scientist. Well, I didn't want to send anyone to their deaths so I made them all guard the scientist while I went out and kicked ass. I really didn't want to be responsible in that moment for sending someone to their end. This sounds goofy, but it's the same thing we all do everytime we watch a movie or read a book and think 'no, don't go that way' or 'oh no, don't do that'. It's how we are wired.
I think that just like books and movies that some stories and some characters connect with some people and not others and that's just how it is for many complicated reasons. So, I really do think that games already emotionally connect with players. It just depends on the game and the player.
#24
04/03/2006 (1:42 pm)
Quote:strong music and good graphics don't tell us a story.Kinda like a car with no wheels. Yeah you've got something, an engine and seats, but your not getting anywhere with it. To get the full impact and draw the most out of the player you need the graphics and sound as well as the story. Otherwise don't waste your time. Also, I don't see anyone getting emotional during gameplay. Maybe a little kid crying because his Nintendog died but kids cry for all sorts of stupid reasons. I'm talking about adults being emotionally impacted by a game. I can't see it any other way than in a cut scene with grown up (serious) issues involved.
#25
Hmmm... who's to say what's stupid. I think kids are simply more sensative to the world around them ... they haven't been scarred yet. It's not cool to trivialize their emotions ... they are emotions just the same and the relative impact on them is similar to something you might consider to be more serious.
04/03/2006 (1:49 pm)
To me the 'cut-scene' is just a movie which breaks up the game.Quote:
kids cry for all sorts of stupid reasons.
Hmmm... who's to say what's stupid. I think kids are simply more sensative to the world around them ... they haven't been scarred yet. It's not cool to trivialize their emotions ... they are emotions just the same and the relative impact on them is similar to something you might consider to be more serious.
#26
The music and graphics and scenery and directing and all of that (game or movie or what have you) can enhance the experience, but I really think what does it for many people is the story. It makes the experience. An awesome score and graphics without much of a story isn't going to do much. A story without an awesome score or graphics can still get the job done.
To me, this is how the game industry has failed. It has put the graphics and music and everything else first, and the story (specifically, the storytelling) second. For the most part, I've only seen cool graphics and great music attempted to be "fancied up" by slipping a forced story in.
As for cut scenes, well, I still think those are part of the problem. I think they can be used to good effect, but the fact remains that, most of the time, the gameplay and the telling of the story are separated. The cut scene is the "easy way out" from having to couple gameplay with storytelling. Cut scenes can work but in the end will leave many players feeling empty because that's the main way the story is advanced, yet it is completely non-interactive.
04/03/2006 (1:54 pm)
@Ajari: Maybe. I don't fully disagree with you, and I do think excellent graphics and music do add to the gameplay experience, and can do a good job at eliciting an emotional response. But take movies, for instance. Movies that have great scores and good directing and camerawork certainly can do a good job drawing the viewer in and eliciting a particular response from the way they become engrossed in the work. But there are plenty of movies -- typically, indie movies -- that don't utilize a great score (in fact, many do not have a musical score at all) and yet they certainly can also succeed the same way. Would they do much better with an awesome score, or a Hollywood-style director and cameraman? Not necessarily.The music and graphics and scenery and directing and all of that (game or movie or what have you) can enhance the experience, but I really think what does it for many people is the story. It makes the experience. An awesome score and graphics without much of a story isn't going to do much. A story without an awesome score or graphics can still get the job done.
To me, this is how the game industry has failed. It has put the graphics and music and everything else first, and the story (specifically, the storytelling) second. For the most part, I've only seen cool graphics and great music attempted to be "fancied up" by slipping a forced story in.
As for cut scenes, well, I still think those are part of the problem. I think they can be used to good effect, but the fact remains that, most of the time, the gameplay and the telling of the story are separated. The cut scene is the "easy way out" from having to couple gameplay with storytelling. Cut scenes can work but in the end will leave many players feeling empty because that's the main way the story is advanced, yet it is completely non-interactive.
#27
anyhow, only a story can make you "cry" (and just about any emotion for any reason can invoke tears) ...and games are no less a story telling medium. not having control over an event has nothing to do with anything... in real life there is no shortage of events where individuals who are effected have no control over the afferent situation. and it sounds like you are expecting an interface to make you cry??? just think about what the perfect interface would be... something along the lines of tether free virtual reality (or perfect integration) ...and that would no less make you cry than you would when faced with a real life situation. so again, its the story stupid... and to a lesser extent presentation.
whether or not games with moving stories coupled with compelling or sufficiently abstracted imagery will ever come to be just depends on the crop of the artists our culture is able to produce and the means available to them... and that is another dilemma all together.
all i can add is if you goal is to extract tears from your audience you must do it with artistic integrity. simply somehow torturing your audience clearly does not suffice, and i couldn't imagine why any emotionally balanced individual would seek out and consume such media in the first place.
so yeah, its perfectly possible, if the minds and the tools exist, and the audience is prepared to recieve the message.
04/06/2006 (8:46 am)
geez... just checking to see if you are alive jeremy.anyhow, only a story can make you "cry" (and just about any emotion for any reason can invoke tears) ...and games are no less a story telling medium. not having control over an event has nothing to do with anything... in real life there is no shortage of events where individuals who are effected have no control over the afferent situation. and it sounds like you are expecting an interface to make you cry??? just think about what the perfect interface would be... something along the lines of tether free virtual reality (or perfect integration) ...and that would no less make you cry than you would when faced with a real life situation. so again, its the story stupid... and to a lesser extent presentation.
whether or not games with moving stories coupled with compelling or sufficiently abstracted imagery will ever come to be just depends on the crop of the artists our culture is able to produce and the means available to them... and that is another dilemma all together.
all i can add is if you goal is to extract tears from your audience you must do it with artistic integrity. simply somehow torturing your audience clearly does not suffice, and i couldn't imagine why any emotionally balanced individual would seek out and consume such media in the first place.
so yeah, its perfectly possible, if the minds and the tools exist, and the audience is prepared to recieve the message.
Torque 3D Owner Rubes
I think your approach above to putting emotion into games (using strong music, a "serious" storyline, good graphics, and really well-done cut scenes) is pretty much the reason why most games fail at really evoking strong emotional responses and telling good stories. It just doesn't really get at the issue, which is that most games really are just poor at doing what many of us want them to do: make us experience a story. Those things can make the gaming experience good, but strong music and good graphics don't tell us a story.
@Anton: I think it's one thing to evoke an emotional response, and quite another thing to do what Jeremy was getting at. You can use photorealistic images (or smells, or whatever other sensual stimuli you can imagine) to add to the experience of a game, but it won't get the player to care about the experience all that much more. Game companies have been working towards this for years now, and one thing is certain: better graphics and sound haven't yet succeeded at making people care about what's really happening in the game, or like Jeremy said, care about the characters. More realistic sensations won't do that.
@Jeremy: Just depends on your definition of a cut scene. I don't think the 3rd person view is necessary for the definition of a cut scene. Just the interruption of game play to present a sequence of scripted animations and events (which is completely non-interactive). Half-Life was acclaimed because they were able to accomplish this within the game engine itself, using the first-person perspective (as opposed to "playing a pre-rendered movie").
But your comment on Half-Life is interesting, since it's really not interactive story-telling. It's hours of blowing things away interrupted now and then by a scripted, non-interactive sequence that advances the overall plot. It got the job done and people enjoyed it for that, but it's hardly enough to make people believe it's an interactive story, or much of a story at all. At least not one that would make people care enough about it to evoke an emotional response from the experience.