Saber CEO's Theory on Story in Games

[Deadend]

1up (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3167366) has an interview with Matthew Karch, CEO of Saber Interactive. You may remember Saber for Timeshift (http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39673), which was a fairly overlooked game due to it's years of delays and eventual release somewhere between Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4.

1UP: Looking over my notes on the storytelling panel at GDC, I think you might have been slightly misread, both by myself and by other people who were reporting on your attitude as being anti-narrative in games. It seems like your original point was actually a little more in the middle than that. You originally said that story in games depends on the genre. Could you elaborate on that idea a bit?

Matthew Karch: My attitude about story is that it's important, but how important depends upon what the player is doing. If you're playing a game on the Wii, for example, most games on the Wii are focused on the gameplay mechanic itself. If you play Wii Sports, there is no story, and you don't really care. Maybe sports is a bad example because it's not a story-driven genre, but even when you pass over to the games that I typically play and the ones that we make here -- shooters -- story is important to give the player motivation and to immerse him in the game world, but I don't think it's the most important aspect of the game. If you have a great story but the shooting feels lousy, the animation is bad, and the AI is average, no one is really going to care that you have a great story.

I can't say I agree with everything Karch says, but he does make some great points.

[Sazime]

I talked to Karch a lot at the Timeshift release event. Great fella to chat with, and has an interesting view on the industry in general.

[gawaintheblind]

(Sarcastic comment about how we already know that shooters don't have much of a storyline. Mention of how doom 1 just had a screen of text.)

[alienchild]

These guys made "Will Rock". Everything they touch turns to shit... seen the screens of the original version of Timeshift? The art direction was horrible! Aaanyways, about stories in games; many people/publications have stated over and over again that;

"Gameplay matters the most, story is a sidedish best served for those who want it."

Although I agree on a general basis, I think that if this is the attitude of most game developers, we will see less heavily story based games. Silent Hill 2 is a great example, with one of the best stories in any game (or any other media for that matter), and with a gameplay that was well under par. The game was still fantastic, and a commercial success.

[Purple Santa]

I love the line in the interview "well some in the industry think they are visionaries...we don't know yet...we'll have to wait and see...". Nice passive-aggressive pot shot at those who think they can actually advance the industry by making games with stories. Whether those games succeed or not, at least they are trying. Personally, I think he's got a "dinosaur" attitude where he thinks gamers won't care about story. Yes, some genre's at the moment don't lend to a story. But does that mean someone can't push the envelope? If he wants to stay comfortable, i'm all for that. Stay the dinosaur. I'll support the visionaries, even if they may fail.

[bean19]

It's interesting that he worked on Timeshift. That game had so much time in development and had so many cool concepts that didn't work out. Weak weapons annoyed me, the absolutely awful story that is poorly told and reminiscent of Half-Life 2 also annoyed me, but what got me to stop playing was an extremely difficult jump puzzle with my character who was completely unable to clear more than about two feet from the ground. If I can't progress past your jump puzzle in 15 minutes (and I'm not a jump-puzzle slouch. I was a double-concing insane medic on TFC and I beat most Mario games), then you're puzzle design is fucking awful.

Why the hell did anyone have him on a panel at all? Unless it is a post-mordem telling me why Timeshift with it's very cool concepts had to be made to suck so badly, I don't want to hear about it.

[Deadend]

It's interesting that he worked on Timeshift. That game had so much time in development and had so many cool concepts that didn't work out. Weak weapons annoyed me, the absolutely awful story that is poorly told and reminiscent of Half-Life 2 also annoyed me, but what got me to stop playing was an extremely difficult jump puzzle with my character who was completely unable to clear more than about two feet from the ground. If I can't progress past your jump puzzle in 15 minutes (and I'm not a jump-puzzle slouch. I was a double-concing insane medic on TFC and I beat most Mario games), then you're puzzle design is fucking awful.

Why the hell did anyone have him on a panel at all? Unless it is a post-mordem telling me why Timeshift with it's very cool concepts had to be made to suck so badly, I don't want to hear about it.
I liked Timeshifts old style of Steampunk, the final game was just so derivative feeling.
So in the interview he talks about how some games are art films and some are dumb action movies... I guess he is Uwe Boll then?

[TheKeck]

I think it's interesting that he says nobody cared about the story in Call of Duty 4. That's a large part of what's DRIVING it for me.

[Baron Samedi]

I'd look at BioShock and take issue with that. If you go to a publisher, they'll give you research both ways. If you're in third-person, you see the character, you know what they look like, you can maybe identify with them. You know what they sound like and what they move like. On the other hand, in the first-person perspective, you are the character. Certainly people feel like Gordan Freeman when they're playing Half-Life. I'm not going to say that the Halo series was the best at storytelling, but people feel like Master Chief. People immerse themselves in that character. I think it just depends on how it's executed more than anything else. I don't think it's specific to a particular genre.

Dunno. I go back and forth on this. Many times, I don't feel like the characters at all. Master Chief, Gordon Freeman, Mario - who cares? To me, the defining elements are the controls and the rules. Much like Aarseth said, "The dimensions of Lara Croft's body, already analyzed to death by film theorists, are irrelevant to me as a player, because a different-looking body would not make me play differently... When I play, I don't even see her body, but see through it and past it." The type of games where I care are atmospheric games like Bioshock and Metroid or horror games like RE or Silent Hill. In these, the world itself is the character, and it's trying to make me feel a specific way.

Though I would like to know if anyone does identify with Master Chief. Do you truly feel like Master Chief when you play? Are you Master Chief?

As for story, Adventure and RPG games do that well. Other genres are getting better, with story framing the context and conflict. I suspect most who want games to be art to have schooling in the humanities, and they want story precisely because story is an art they know how to critique. Rulesets most don't. Thus, games will be art because of their stories, not because they're games.

Also, "immersion" is a word that needs to be buried.

[bean19]

Dunno. I go back and forth on this. Many times, I don't feel like the characters at all. Master Chief, Gordon Freeman, Mario - who cares? To me, the defining elements are the controls and the rules. Much like Aarseth said, "The dimensions of Lara Croft's body, already analyzed to death by film theorists, are irrelevant to me as a player, because a different-looking body would not make me play differently... When I play, I don't even see her body, but see through it and past it." The type of games where I care are atmospheric games like Bioshock and Metroid or horror games like RE or Silent Hill. In these, the world itself is the character, and it's trying to make me feel a specific way.

Okay, these are all good points, but I think they tend to detract from the importance of writing good characters. The world is absolutely an important story-telling device, but I wouldn't enjoy Half-Life 2 nearly so much if Alex, Barney, and the doctors weren't genuinely likeable. Setting is extremely important, but I wouldn't say that it is more important than writing good characters or that it can replace this.

Gameplay often lifts bad settings and characterization up, but any element can do that. Lost Odyssey has absolutely derivative RPG gameplay with it's few different features (like making rings) being more decorative than actually impacting gameplay. However, the story and characters lift up the mediocre gameplay and make it an excellent title.

Rarely do you find a game that does it all. When games deliver great setting, characters, story, and gameplay then they sell like crazy and become powerful IPs like Bioshock, God of War, and Half-Life 2.

The point, really, is that developers shouldn't say any one of these pieces is unimportant. What they are really saying is, "I'm not good at X, but I don't want to give up control of X. Players should like my games anyway."

Though I would like to know if anyone does identify with Master Chief. Do you truly feel like Master Chief when you play? Are you Master Chief?

Hmm. . . I think what happens is that Master Chief becomes unimportant (as does Gordon Freeman and other "blank" characters). What I feel is anger at the mob that just shot me, concern for Cortanna's safety, and concern for saving the galaxy. This isn't through a Master Chief "lens", and I don't feel transported, but I do feel concern and excitement based on these things.

I don't think you need a "blank" character for this to happen though. I was just as concerned about problems in games with well-defined characters (Kingdom Hearts, Bioshock, God of War). I can experience emotions through the "lens" of a main character too. We do this all the time when we watch film and tv.

Also, "immersion" is a word that needs to be buried.

Immersion has become one of those words that has too many meanings to different people. I only use it when it is clearly defined by context now.

[Kefkataran]

Why the hell did anyone have him on a panel at all? Unless it is a post-mordem telling me why Timeshift with it's very cool concepts had to be made to suck so badly, I don't want to hear about it.

I haven't played TimeShift and I'm clearly not as angry at Karch as you are, but as he said, I think he was invited on the panel largely to serve as a voice of dissent in what was largely a very story-focused crowd of developers.

I liked Timeshifts old style of Steampunk, the final game was just so derivative feeling.
So in the interview he talks about how some games are art films and some are dumb action movies... I guess he is Uwe Boll then?

He compares himself to Jerry Bruckheimer, for what that's worth.

I think it's interesting that he says nobody cared about the story in Call of Duty 4. That's a large part of what's DRIVING it for me.

When I got to this point as I was transcribing the interview, I wished I would've pursued this more. In the final interview as published, it sounds like I didn't care about CoD4's story at all. While I didn't think it was the best part of the game, I was actually impressed with some aspects of it, so I should've pushed Karch a bit on that. Next time. :)


I suspect most who want games to be art to have schooling in the humanities, and they want story precisely because story is an art they know how to critique. Rulesets most don't. Thus, games will be art because of their stories, not because they're games.

I disagree with this. There's a whole school of intellectual gamers (ludology) focused on gameplay itself as art, so that can certainly be seen and critiqued as art on its own. However -- and admittedly, this is coming from someone with schooling in the humanities -- I don't necessarily see the negative aspects of wanting story as part of the art of a game. Just as movies mix visual, auditory, and narrative art into one medium, videogames can do all of those and add play itself without having to get rid of any of the others.

[bean19]

I haven't played TimeShift and I'm clearly not as angry at Karch as you are, but as he said, I think he was invited on the panel largely to serve as a voice of dissent in what was largely a very story-focused crowd of developers.

Your interview definitely got this point across. I have a problem with that too. He shouldn't just take the "bad guy" position if he doesn't support it. It is great that your interview allowed him to clarify his position.

He also made it clear that Timeshift had problems that were probably not related to his management of the project. I've met developers and know some of them, so I do realize that I'm heavily criticizing projects that real people spent large amounts of their lives working to make great. . . but, if we are going to talk about game design honestly on a gamer enthusiast site, with the goal presumably being to talk honestly about what we enjoy and dislike about our hobby, then I don't think the developer's feelings should be taken into account.

[Kefkataran]

Your interview definitely got this point across. I have a problem with that too. He shouldn't just take the "bad guy" position if he doesn't support it. It is great that your interview allowed him to clarify his position.

He also made it clear that Timeshift had problems that were probably not related to his management of the project. I've met developers and know some of them, so I do realize that I'm heavily criticizing projects that real people spent large amounts of their lives working to make great. . . but, if we are going to talk about game design honestly on a gamer enthusiast site, with the goal presumably being to talk honestly about what we enjoy and dislike about our hobby, then I don't think the developer's feelings should be taken into account.

While I don't totally agree with that, I also don't necessarily disagree. Hopefully it didn't seem like I was playing it too soft in the interview. To be fair to Karch, it was originally supposed to be an interview focused on the panel, but I ended up talking quite a bit about the TimeShift stuff. He didn't really need to answer any of my questions about that, but he was nice enough to in what I thought was a fairly honest way.

[bean19]

You know me. If a developer joins the conversation, I am always polite (unless it is Raph Koster). That's where I draw the line. If they join the conversation, then they are part of the conversation and deserve courtesy and respect. When they aren't on here, then I'm a gamer talking about games and if I insult a game, then I'm insulting JUST the game. So, I think I probably crossed the line here by implying that he shouldn't have been on a panel simply because I think his company's last game was abysmal and I do hope that their next project is a success.

However, if it contains another jump puzzle that is as frustrating as the one in Timeshift, I will never even rent another one of their titles. I don't believe that game companies are only as good as their last project. I believe they are only as good as their last two projects. :)

Also, Karch appears to have a thick-skin about the criticism:

Karch: No. I don't mean to sound too abrupt about it, but honestly, if I show you my game and I respect you and your opinion and your readership, I want your feedback. I want you to be honest. Based upon the enthusiasm of people in the press, I can then make changes to the game. We're so close to this process. I can make something that I think is fun and outstanding and amazing, but until I get it in front of the people whose opinions actually matter, my opinion is meaningless. I believe you have to get careful that you don't get people bored with your concept, but you definitely want to get the press involved.

I didn't think you were soft in the interview because it was really a clarification piece. I think you did a great job because you delved deeper into the issues and got interesting, thoughtful answers. The thoughtfulness of these answers actually got me to the point that I am interested in reading/hearing more about their new project instead of instantly dismissing it because it was from the studio that made Timeshift.

[Kefkataran]

Also, I do want to try TimeShift eventually, although this jumping puzzle you mention has me very worried. Haha. I'm good at the platforming and jumping as well, but frustrating jumping puzzles piss me off quickly if they're clearly just badly designed.

But yeah, I'm also interested in hearing more on the new project and seeing if the concept is as innovative as they say it is. Hopefully soon.

[bean19]

Also, I do want to try TimeShift eventually, although this jumping puzzle you mention has me very worried. Haha. I'm good at the platforming and jumping as well, but frustrating jumping puzzles piss me off quickly if they're clearly just badly designed.

It is terribly designed, which is really sad because the time puzzle involved is excellent. The problem is that the actual jumping in the game is ridiculously bad and they put in one of those nearly impossible perfect-timing-required jumps at the end of a complicated time puzzle that must be repeated to even attempt the nearly impossible jump again.

To be fair, there might be a humane way around this or I might have been killing myself to get to a special bonus area, though I checked for other routes extensively and could not find one (I played at launch and a FAQ was not yet out).

Still, I'm not new at this, so I imagine many other gamers and especially non-gamers ran into this wall. A wall that obvious should have easily been found if they had focus-group tested the product even a little.