• Home
  • About

Digital Kicks

Videogames, Excess, and the Palace of Wisdom

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Wait I’ve Got A Plan
Bros. of the Old Republic »

Conversation is Conflict

October 5, 2009 by Lyndon

A battle of wills

I finally got around to watching Inglorious Basterds on the weekend. It’s a freakin stunning film, Tarrantino manages to break out of his phoney b-grade rut and deliver perhaps his most restrained and classical film since Reservoir Dogs.  I remember after watching Death Proof I said to a friend that I really wished Tarrantino would drop the shlock action and just write something where a bunch of people talked because dialogue not action is what the man does better than anyone else alive*. For the most part Inglorious Basterds is that and I loved it more than any other film I’ve seen all year.

But this is a blog about videogames so I better get to my point. Inglorious Basterds reminded me of something script writing teachers often say that I think would be invaluable for game designers to think about. Basically, conversation is conflict and dialogue is action.

Now I know there are a lot of people who wrinkle at the merest suggestion that games have something to learn from film. That film is old non-interactive media and if games are to reach their full potential they need to leave behind this juvenile film envy.  If you honestly believe that, if that is your opinion then fine cool but you’re not allowed back onto the internet until you watch the entirety of Man with a Movie Camera, don’t just browse or skim, watch all of it because that is what happens to a medium when it stubbornly rejects the techniques of older more established art forms in the name of progress.**

Right now the game they're playing is harmless but later on it become much more deadly.

My other point is that if game designers embraced what I’m about to outline it would actually lead to more game-like games not less game-like games. Here’s something that film theorist and academic David Bordwell had to say on his blog about Tarrantino’s use of dialogue.

Now Tarantino’s digressions (three daughters, rats and squirrels, a card game, the correct pronunciation of Italian) don’t read as self-indulgence, but rather as feints in a confidence game. Here Tarantino’s tendency to write endless scenes, something he confesses in his recent Creative Screenwriting interview on the film, is fully harnessed to more classic, albeit unusually extended, scene structure.

Not only is David Bordwell pointing out that the dialogue in Inglorious Basterds is game-like but that game-like dialogue is actually classical Hollywood screen writing technique. And he’s absolutely right the number one rule that any aspiring screen writer learns is that “conflict equals drama”. Every scene needs to include drama other wise its wasting valuable time. But how do you create drama? You have a situation with at least two characters who have conflicting goals, what then grows out of that is a scene where there’s a back and forth as the two characters battle for the upper hand. Keep that in mind as you watch this clip from Kramer Versus Kramer.

In the first two lines we establish what these characters are trying to achieve. From there it becomes a battle, a struggle with each and every line an attempt by one character to gain advantage. There’s a moment where Dustin thinks they’re reached a stalemate (for him a net win) but then Meryl plays her trump card

“Well you can’t deny me access…”

It’s a game changer, you can almost see the critical hit + 10 damage go flying off Dustin. His reaction is to escalate the conflict, jumping over the top of Meryl’s line and even physically intimidate her. I love Meryl’s next line.

“I have anticipated this whole thing”

It’s like the ultimate passive aggressive buff and Dustin knows he’s screwed. He can’t hurt her but she can continue to hurt him. Like anyone who has ever accidentally tangled with a boss fight before they were ready he beats a hasty retreat but not before taking out his frustration on the wine glass. But even that serves as a form of physical intimidation which presumably has some sort of lasting damage/time effect so that in the future when he faces her again she won’t be at full health.

But conversations are never like this in games. Most of the time NPCs serve as exposition dumps cheerily telling me everything I want to know at the drop of a hat. Why don’t NPCs ever try to withhold information, or deceive you? Or better yet have a goal that they’re trying to achieve? I want the conversations in games to not be something you skip to get to the game but actually the game itself.

* For my money the current king of shlock action is Ryuhei Kitamura . Actually his take on Godzilla is probably the best thing in the universe.

** The thing about Man with a Movie Camera is if you really love cinema, like as a unique artform and shit, it’s basically a masterpiece. I honestly don’t love cinema enough to like it but there are people that do.

Like this:

Like
Be the first to like this post.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

3 Responses

  1. on October 7, 2009 at 1:28 am Lord Rocket

    Player primacy, I guess. There seems to be a certain unwillingness among developers and publishing houses to really surprise the player of a game (Ken Levine mentions here, don’t follow that link if you haven’t played Shock 2 yet, it’s full of spoilers, that his decision to write a betrayal into the game was ‘controversial.’ I haven’t seen anything quite like that done since, either, so I doubt the taboo has been lifted).
    There seems to be an increasing unwillingness among designers of both p&p and computer games to render the player, or their characters for that matter, anything less than invincible/infallible. This largely seems, I’m sorry to say, to be because the people playing are a massive bunch of girls. These are grown men we’re talking about.


  2. on October 7, 2009 at 7:14 am pigsoft

  3. on October 11, 2009 at 6:20 am aonshix

    The Metal Gear series thrives on false conversations between characters with ulterior motives, however I agree that by and large the medium is really begging for more mature dialogue in the narratives it portrays. The main obstacle for such conversation at the moment, is the pressing lack of complex characterisation, aka goals + motivations. Until characters start being written with more depth, this sort of conversation is just not going to happen as characters share identical values far too often. Conversation like you describe would certainly be nice, but until the characters in our stories grow up, it’s going to remain a pipe dream :(

    Well written, through.



Comments are closed.

  • Archives

    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • May 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
  • Categories

    • Game Diaries
    • Schooling the Old
    • Uncategorized
  • Other fine videogame sites

    • Action Button
    • Critical Distance
    • Fidgit
    • Hardcasual
    • Rock Paper Shotgun
    • The Blue Casket
  • Pals

    • little-scale
    • moorefilmhub
    • Paperback City
    • Re:Surface
    • Red_Robin
    • The Gloaming
    • The Master
  • Twitter

    • "Spiral-bound notebooks shed pages too easily." http://emily.short.usesthis.com/ Weirdly that's exactly what I like about them. 1 year ago
    • @TheGameCritique that and the cheesehats :P 1 year ago
    • @TheGameCritique ...who thought that their ownership rules were fascinating. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Bay_Packers#Public_company 1 year ago
    • @TheGameCritique Yeah it's funny cause I only became a fan of the Packers cause my Dad was friends with a bunch of politics nerds... 1 year ago
    • It's weird cause I have no idea what Americans think about that. Like are Green Bay hated on the same level as socialized medicine? 1 year ago

Blog at WordPress.com.

Theme: MistyLook by Sadish.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Powered by WordPress.com