Worlds of Design: Story vs. Gameplay

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.​

Which Comes First?​

This is an age-old question in the realm of game design: Which element takes precedence—the narrative arc of the story, or the functional constraints and mechanisms of the gameplay? We must consider this question from two perspectives: which comes first in the design process, and which is more important for the final version of the game? For an established adventure, the gameplay is largely predetermined by the ruleset, but for designing an entire game from the ground up, the choice of starting point fundamentally alters the outcome.

When tackling game design, it’s a common mistake for newcomers to begin with a rich story. When I taught game development (now retired), and I asked beginners to write a treatment for a game (a brief description of a game, a few pages), they wrote about a story. They didn't have a game at all, because they hadn't thought about how the mechanisms of the game might support their story.

Ernest W. Adams, founder of the International Game Developers' Association (IGDA), argues strongly against this approach:

It is absolutely, positively, better to design the gameplay first and then weave a story into it afterward. Starting with the story is a mistake that far too many young designers make because that's (comparatively) easy and fun, and you get to be very creative. But often you find that you've spent a lot of time and money on it without having checked to see if your game will be fun to play.

Starting with the story is appealing because it is creatively easy and fun, but it often leads to a substantial investment of time and money before determining if the game is actually enjoyable to play. In essence, a strong narrative without a fun mechanical core is not a game at all; it's just a treatment.

Mechanisms Define the Game​

A game, fundamentally, is a set of mechanisms that provide constraints which players must follow. Whether these constraints are built into the code of a video game or written into the rules of a tabletop game (where a GM usually enforces them), they are the necessary engine of action. While a few genre-specific video games might prioritize "experience" over mechanism, true game design is not equivalent to writing a story. What happens in a game may resemble a story, but that is the result of the mechanics, not the starting point.

This mechanical-first approach is supported by industry veterans like Mark Maratea, Technical Director and Software Architect for AAA and mobile games:

You want 1% of the story. Then 80% of the mechanics. Then the rest of the story and the 20% of the mechanics that depend on the story. Why 1%? Because you need to know a few things to make informed decisions. Is that combat? Indoors environments? Outdoors? Both? Biped enemies? Quads? Flying? Melee attacks? Ranged? 1st person? 3rd person? Single player? Multiplayer? Both? Drop in/drop out?

This 1% of story is vital because it determines foundational decisions: Is the game about combat? Are the enemies bipedal or flying? Is it 1st or 3rd person? These mechanical questions must be answered before a full story can be properly supported.

Player Agency vs. Designer’s Story​

Ultimately, the goal of a game designer is to design a game, not write a story. As Adams notes:

Players buy games to do things: explore, shoot, drive, fly, build, design, buy, sell, solve puzzles, and so on. If they wanted just to be told a story, they would watch TV. The story serves a number of functions, but you must prototype and test the moment-by-moment gameplay first, so you know that it's enjoyable. Then you can weave the story around the action.

If players only wanted story, they would watch television. In the final design, prioritizing story severely limits replayability, as players "beat the game" and move on. More significantly, a dominant, built-in narrative can alienate "serious" players by reducing their agency—their ability to make a significant difference in the outcome.

Game First, Context Second​

While there are many excellent, small-scale RPGs that are based on specific, story-heavy situations, the "big" tentpole RPGs—the ones designed for enduring, long-term play—invariably prioritize the gameplay mechanisms first, even if they are situated within a rich setting. What matters in the end is the designer’s intent, but the most enduring titles are those where the mechanics are solid enough to let the players write their own story.

Your Turn: Do you prefer to play specific-scenario RPGs, or the “big” ones that let you attach your own setting/stories to it?

 

[dragoner]

Your Turn: Do you prefer to play specific-scenario RPGs, or the “big” ones that let you attach your own setting/stories to it?

Usually the big ones, though not adverse to a palate cleanser one shot of smaller ones.