Book/Article Readings - Dramatic Tension

Week 3 Reading

This weeks reading was an article of Marc Leblanc, and how he introduces us to mechanics we can use to create dramatic tension in games.

"Tools for Creating Dramatic Game Dynamics" - Marc Leblanc.

This article can be found in the book "The Game Design Reader  - Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman - published by MIT Press (2006)" but is not yet available online. For the purpose of this Blog and reading for the week I pulled my information from the article that is posted on Blackboard Learn within LearnUCS.

From the start, LeBlanc shows that there are two types of story in games. The first being a traditional story told through the narrative of the game, much like a traditional book. The other is through the way a game is played and the events of the game itself, such as sports making it into the newspaper or a game of chess - the plans, bluffs, strategies or maybe the reversal of one's fortune. This type of play can lead to a climax, through struggle to a satisfying conclusion, this is how LeBlanc defines 'Dramatic'.

Players seek out drama within games as a type of fun, this is a part of a game's play content, therefore designers aim build drama into their games.

Drama within MDA Framework:

Aesthetic model for Drama - Drama is one of many aesthetic models. The below image represents drama via the use of a graph:

The main point of this graph is to see that dramatic tension can increase and decrease. Dramatic tension is the level of emotional investment in the story's conflict. With the feelings such as concern, apprehension and urgency with which players await the story's outcome.

Game designers have a greater challenge of creating drama even when they have no direct control over narrative, but instead emerges through the events of the game.

Conflict is required for dramatic tension to take place, this can be used through the contest from which a game is built such as challenges of intellect or stamina or competition between multiple players. Tension comes from conflict in two ways, both of which are required:

1. Uncertainty - A sense that the outcome of the game is still unknown. Any player could win or lose.
2. Inevitability - The sense that the contest is moving towards resolution. The outcome is imminent.

Both of the above are independent of each other, they are evoked using different systems and dynamics, which makes it easier for a designer giving finer control over each element separately for tuning and adjusting. When uncertainty and inevitability intersect, this gives rise to the peak of dramatic tension.

Most techniques that imbue dramatic tension use two main approaches, 'force' and 'illusion', (a ticking clock/timer is a common example of these):

• Force is manipulating the state of the contest itself. We make a game close because we limit how much advantage one player can have over another.
• Illusion is manipulating players to make the game seem closer than it actually is.

The feedback system used in conjunction with uncertainty:

1. The Game State - examples would be a save game function or the name of a level with each individual object within it or even the time left on a clock.
2. Scoring Function - numeric value given to players as a measurement to see who is winning and by how much.
3. The Game Mechanical Bias - the rule of a game which gives one player an advantage over another.
4. The Controller - the rule of the game that decides which player receives the mechanical bias with the decision being made from the scoring function.

An example of the above system is the 'Negative Feedback System' which keeps the game close by bringing the score function closer towards zero. The 'Positive Feedback System' would be seen as the opposite, striving to keep the difference in score as large as possible.

The negative feedback system is a powerful tool in creating dramatic tension as it keeps the game uncertain, players won't know the outcome of the game as the scoring difference would be as close to zero as possible, therefore creating dramatic uncertainty. When aiming towards the end of a game, using the positive feedback system is useful for dispelling uncertainty, bringing about the climax and a sense of finality. Using only the negative feedback system can cause games to go stagnate, so positive feedback systems are needed for breaking the equilibrium and moving a game forward. (I picture this as a fog covering land at the start of day, with the sun coming out later - clearing the fog and leading one side to victory).

Pseudo-Feedback is a mechanism used to create game dynamics that make a game appear as though it is being driven by a negative feedback system, however there is no actual cybernetic feedback system at all.

Escalation is a game mechanic used to make the score gain get faster and faster as the game progresses so more points are at stake at the end of the game than there were at the start.

Hidden Energy is another tool used, and example of this could be 'turbo fuel' on a racing game, each player has and equal amount of hidden energy at the start of the game but the timing of using this fuel can change the outcome. This mechanic creates dramatic uncertainty by manipulating the players incomplete understanding of the true score of the game.

Fog of War is a mechanic used to create dramatic uncertainty by limiting the information available to players. As a game progresses, more information becomes available.

Decelerator is used as an obstacle that slows down players later in the game, making it seem that the game is closer than it actually is by changing the scale and pace of the game.

Cashing Out is another mechanic used. An example of this would be if a player wins a round of a particular game, the start of the next round bother players start even, but the first player to get three wins will win the game. This shows that the player who wins the first round will not necessarily win the game, however it does give them a greater chance at winning as they are one win closer than the opposition.

From the above mechanical systems I personally believe Cashing Out is the least used of the five as it appears to be the most complex.

Conclusion:

Again, this article proved to be informative as it provided technical names for the design tools we use when creating drama and dramatic tension within games. It helps us pinpoint each area we need to concentrate on for future projects.

I agree with each of the examples used by LeBlanc, and feel like I know exactly what he means through the use of planting an image inside my head as I read each paragraph.