BIG APPLE, 3AM

I recently unsubscribed from the IGDA Writers SIG mailing list. It is an incestuous, narrow-minded, self-congratulating community of writers who wrongfully believe they are still going to be relevant in 5 years. The fact of the matter is they have perfected their craft. The craft as they know it, as they learned from numerous writing workshops for other media, has reached a plateau with nowhere else to go. They know stories in games aren't perfect, but they don't understand why. Apply a 3-Act structure. Create compelling character development. Write smart dialogue. This is their recipe for a great game story, and when it only results in drivel that is worse than a B-Movie they throw up their hands in despair and lament the fact that they weren't brought into the project earlier.

The problem is of a more fundamental nature: A writer cannot create a meaningful story in a game.

Everything writers know about character development - or story arc, or anything for that matter - is irrelevant in a medium where the player is the central figure, where it is the player's personal story that matters. You cannot write player development, only design for it. You cannot write a compelling and meaningful game story, only design for one.

Miko Wilson, a young narrative designer at Relic, offered one of the few insightful contributions to a recent Writers SIG discussion of the definition of story. It was, of course, completely ignored. I don't know if it was because the implications of his observation were too horrible for these career writers to publically consider, or because the blinders they were wearing prevented them from seeing those implications in the first place. He said, paraphrasing, "I never would have thought my favourite part of game writing would be level design." And with that, Miko, Narrative Designer at one of the most successful game studios in the world, a member of Generation Y, sealed the fate of everyone on that mailing list. Game stories are not written, they are designed. You are irrelevant. Every month you continue to have an influence on mainstream games is another month we have to wait until they can achieve their full potential. You need to learn to become a Storyteller, a Narrative Designer, or learn to work in a non-interactive medium. It's that simple.

Corvus Elrod, improvisational storyteller, was the only other person making sense in that discussion, but his pleadings for these people to reconsider their approach to games fell on deaf ears. He was speaking to the wrong crowd. There are many people in the industry willing to give actual thought to improving storytelling in games. One of the most interesting sessions at GDC this year was about the level design in Far Cry 2, and how it was developed to encourage player self-expression and improvisation. In other words, how the game design encouraged emergent, personal, powerful, moment-to-moment stories. You can't write an experience, only the context of that experience. Context has never made anyone cry.

Of course, writers are still needed in some capacity. Dialogue needs to be convincing. Settings need to be fleshed out. Characters require a backstory.  But this is all context. The dialogue provides context for the relationships the player develops through interaction with designed game systems. I am not saying writing story bibles or dialogue is useless, but the interaction between player and designer and system is not something a writer can or should have any control over. Writers can enrich a player's experience in the same way good sound and art direction enriches it, but they cannot shape or define the core of this interactive experience.

Please, writers, take a back seat. Stop thinking you have the ability or tools to create an interesting game story. Stop interfering with what you don't understand. Accept that designers, and designers alone, can define the conditions that allow the player to participate in the creation of meaningful stories, and in this way realize the potential of the medium.