Are interactive stories really games?

I have seen a trend recently. Not sure if its that new. But its about “visual novels”. Mostly they are Japanese. And they seem to have very little interaction. As an example, one I am playing recently is a free demo called Starlight Vega. It’s kind of interesting though the characterisation is a little generic. Sometimes they might have different endings depending on one of the very few decisions you might make.

They seem to be quite popular. I think particularly with girls. And they also get good exposure because YouTubers can read them out on their channels for easy content. They also seem have high reviews despite repetitious artwork and animation mainly consists of sliding things into frame. I guess people really are just liking it for the story.

What do you think about them? Would you play (or make?) one yourself? Is Unity a good engine to use to make them do you think?

I guess it goes to show, that you don’t need tonnes of artwork and 3D models in your game if you have a good story and writing.

zork

5 Likes

Yes, interactive stories are games.

The history of computer games is dominated by what we now refer to as video games; tennis, space war, and pong being the three big early ones. But during that time there were several text based games made that were simply lost to the sands of time as they were never commercialized or wide spead. Usually small projects students or employees with access to mainframes and shared among their friends. And make no mistake, these were referred to as computer games long before the term “video games” was even coined. That phrase even exists to an extent to try to differ themselves from the text based games of the time in that they had elements of “video”, or moving images, and were not simply text based. At around the same time text based games, which were mostly text based adventure games, tried to rebrand themselves as interactive fiction to give an air of legitimacy in the literary world and pull away from the term “games”. This was not because they weren’t games, but because they were trying to find a way to market themselves to a wider audience.

And here we are today with people arguing that “walking simulators” or “interactive fiction”, or several other forms of interactive media aren’t “games”.

A game is defined as “structured play”. One could argue that anything is a game if you want it to be with that definition, which I would agree with as well, but I’m not going to argue that peeling potatoes was intended as a game. I would however argue that those who create “interactive stories” and other “not games” do so with the intent that people play with them, and thus they are games.

4 Likes

The “new” part, is western developers making “Japanese like” visual novels while totally missing the point.

Other than that, it’s a very very old genre.

3 Likes

FYI, one of the first “interactive stories” ever released came out in 1930. No, that’s not a typo. Consider the Consequences! was an interactive story book published in 1930. Around the mid 1970’s, at almost exactly the same time as Pong started making a splash, and the first text adventure computer game “Adventure”, so did the start of what would become “Choose Your Own Adventure” books. These are interactive story books that anyone who grew up in the US during the 80’s or 90’s likely remember. They’re a genre of fiction referred to as … gamebooks.

So, again, these kinds of things have been referred to as games long before now. It’s only people’s own preconceived notion of what a “game” is being limited to more recent console and arcade style video games that they’re familiar with getting in the way.

5 Likes

Please elaborate. What is the point in your opinion?

I am unsure what you’re asking (and opinions need to have a point?).

In any case, I’ll elaborate on the “missing the point” part, in case it relates to your question. A lot of western “Japanese like” visual novels are more or less a collection of bad tropes and little else. They play more like how people who don’t really play visual novels think they play.

It would be like me making an “American blockbuster” type movie and it’s just a series of explosions and nothing else.

2 Likes

But same goes for a great majority of jvns.
And if you made an “American blockbuster” type movie and it’s just a series of explosions and nothing else, I’d bet even that would sell.

I disagree.

Sure, maybe? But it would be a representation of a caricature of what American blockbusters are and not a representation of what they actually are.

Yes, they’re really games.
Yes, I would, played a ton, and would make one if I could pull off artistic side.
Unity is a decent engine for the purpose, because you’ll need to jury-rig your own framework for VN specific windows, but it is fully suitable.

And yes, zork.

That’s true, but there were more of a good stuff appearing lately. I heard sunrider is good, though I never had the time to play it. Katawa shoujo is another good western one, plus russians managed create “Eternal Summer” as a collab project. Also, heard a lot of positive things about it.

The author of Magical Diary (I think they were called “hanako games”) creates a line of games that are quite close to a classic visual novel, but have something unique.

3 Likes

Yes, I’m particularly talking about the “Japanese like” visual novels. These seem to be a different genre than normal text based adventures (“go north”, “pick up axe”, “use ladder”, etc.) I think the difference is the Japanese or manga type visual novels are more geared towards characterisation and are often in 3rd person rather than 1st person. And they often have themes similar to manga like relationships etc. You don’t use logic to solve the game, rather you make seemingly random choices which make the story move in different directions. All endings are “correct” so there’s no winning or losing. As such can it be considered a “game?” if there is no competitive element?

Eh.

Ace Attorney is a visual novel.

Manga have a whole bunch of themes and so do visual novels.

Yes.

As such it means you may not be very familiar with the genre.

Visual novels usually are played in first person perspective. You hear dialogue of the character whose actions you currently affect.

A lot of visual novels feature bad endings. Some of the bad endings result in protagonist’s death, which can be sometimes very horrible. Some games make fun of that and give you an achievement for collecting all 25 bad endings, for example.

In a scenario where there are no bad endings, usually the main motivation is to either figure out how to get to the “true ending” route, which can be very difficult, or direct the game into the route you want (especially if it is the kind where you want protagonist to win over a specific character). Even in this case there’s usually “default route” which means you’ve messed up and lost.

With that in mind visual novel works simiraly to a puzzle game - you analyze the story/behavior and try to discern choices which will lead you to the desired outcome.

In addition to that, there are hybrids. For example, there are visual novels that use turn based strategy segments. I saw gameplay similar to europa universalis (meaning map painter part of Total War) in a few titles. Then there are games with mecha combat.

One example of such hybrid is Sakura Taisen series. Visual Novel segments + minigames + turn based non-grid mecah combat. Then we have disgaea. Persona games also have very strong visual novel elements.

In addition to unlocking route extra motivation is collecting character and event artwork.

The separate thing from this is kinetic novels, those really do not have any choices. Examples include Karakara games on steam (which I ALSO haven’t played) However, I think even those cases it is “interactive entertainment” somewhere halfway between a game and a movie.

Either way, the normal time to beat a visual novel is around 40…60 hours to unlock everything. It is kind ahard to claim it is “non game” at this point. Also I think the right idea is to treat “visual novel story progression” as a gameplay mechanic, which can be combined with many other mechanics to create something.

1 Like

It’s true it’s not a “game” without an element of chance, but it is interactive entertainment, and calling it a game is the simplest fit for something sold in the same markets under games. It’s the most widely understood. As there is sometimes an element of chance in walking simulations and sometimes not, I will happily include them as being games, just slower and more experience driven.

Don’t let semantics get in the way of making something widely understood. In any case, there probably will never be a formal classification and it can’t fit in other store categories well enough.

Games (in our context) are a shorthand for all entertaining digital experiences that require input.

2 Likes

Yes. Unity works for this type of game.
One of my unfinished projects is a CYOA book where the book makes choices too.
I haven’t discarded it yet, because I am so proud of the framework I did up, I just got burnt out at the writing.
I might jump back into it because of this thread…

I think along as there is something that gives it play, it can be called a game. An example is the choose your own adventure books that used to sell local here. by making a choice I am playing. The choice changes the story, because according to the choice you have to read certain pages. Making a choice is like making a move.

Dungeon and dragons is sort of like a story game. Except there is dice rolled with every choice/move you make. I am of course talking about the traditional dungeon and dragon games, not the video games.

1 Like

I love fighting fantasy series. Novels with choice :slight_smile:

1 Like

But in that case, that would mean an e-book is a game. I would say it isn’t. Just because it’s on a computer and you have to turn the pages with a keyboard or mouse. Or is a movie a game? Because you can “interact” with it by rewinding it or jumping to different sections. Or perhaps a movie becomes a game once it is in a movie player that you can interact with.

Other things which are not-games I would say are sandbox “games” mode should be classed as a “toys”. And live action roll-playing “games” should be classed as “improvisation theatre”.

Your argument is silly because it indicates that all of existence is a game. You’ve basically laid down a rule where turning a page is a game. While we’re at it let’s call everything “UGG” until some other caveman shouts “OGG”.

The great game of life.