Thursday, December 15, 2011
Terminology
Videogame does a poor job of conveying the depth of the item. Interactive Fiction does an even worse job, however. Maybe Computer Game, with reference to Lopes, is the best option.
Writing in Gears of War 3
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2011/oct/03/gears-3-karen-traviss-interview
Gears of War 3 is not a game vying to be high-art. It is unashamedly a violent and brutal video game. It is the third game of the series and closes the trilogy’s plot, which it does have. Karen Traviss is the writer for this game, but wasn’t for the previous two. She was the author of some tie-in novels for the franchise, which consists of the games and literature – graphic and purely text. Some notable things to mention are that Traviss had never written for a game before and that she had no real knowledge about the franchise when going into writing for it. While she has her opinions on the matter, I want to take a moment and reflect on how important her writing is for the game as compared to the rest of its content.
In a game like this, it’s easy to observe it as two parts – narrative and game. On one side, you have cinematic cut-scenes that give exposition and establish conflicts; on the other, you have a shooting gallery that you complete in order to expose more narrative (if you’re even thinking that big picture). This clear separation between the two fails to capture some of the nuances of video game. For example, oftentimes in Gears of War 3, the characters speak to each other while taking on enemies or scrounging for supplies. Some of these lines of dialogue are very contextual, e.g. “I’m reloading” or “Enemy here!”, etc., but some are devices for characterization – though I would argue that even the seemingly banal remarks of empty clips also contribute. Regardless, some of the dialogue reveals information about character drive and desire as well as worries. These occur within the game space. They thus contribute to narrative. What Traviss has done well with this game is to write those areas well enough so that when players are taken out of the game space, and into cinematic cut-scenes, the characters seem to line up with what the game space established. So, when Cole relives the glory of his Thrashball career during his assault on a group of enemies, it doesn’t seem out-of-place even though it removes the player from active play. This pacing is well done.
The overall arc of the story is intriguing. I say this with a bit of surprise in my voice because I didn’t expect such issues of right to life, exploitation of natural resources, and extinction of species, to be treated with the kind of depth that this genre of game typically has. It was really a fault of presupposing on my part. There are three major species on the planet of Sera – the humans, the locust, and the lambent. The initial conflict was between the first two, and the last creature there came into the picture during the second game and more prominently in the final game of the trilogy. The game is set in an alternative world, which is important when considering how to define the “humans”. They are not really humans so much as established as being the same sort of being as humans. The locust dwell underneath the earth and the lambent are a parasitic being that seek to consume all resources. There is an irony in that all three of these species are vying for resources; each of them is seeking to destroy the others in order to safely collect those resources, to insure their survival. Obviously, it is easiest to side with the humans and that is indeed who the player participates as.
In Gears of War 3 these issues of right to resources are made prescient. While there in previous games, none emphasized it as much. The humans sought out a fuel source which forced the locust from their homes, which started a war. The lambent developed out of the exploitation of the fuel source, as they were the fuel source – a sort of sci-fi Gaia theory, as it were. The final game has all there species coming to a head against each other, with the only solution the humans present is the destruction of the locust and lambent to preserve humanity. Apparently a human sympathizer had been aiding the locusts and began to act as their queen. Through that position she attempted to take the professor Fenix and force him to find a cure that didn’t jeopardize the locust. Fenix failed and enacted his plant anyway.
You play the role of Marcus Fenix, son of that professor. His perspective on the events is limited – he is a simple man with simple objectives: save his life and the lives of others. He doesn’t understand the technology in this world or the politics at work, he is just a soldier and nothing more. This perspective allowed the author, Traviss, to explore these very serious themes without becoming heavy-handed in presentation. Fenix lacks the self-reflection to respond meaningfully to these sorts of questions – mainly because his concerns are more immediate.
But Traviss takes this game that deals with a sort of uber-violence and allows it to be a vessel for a meaningful plot. The game encouraged me personally to reflect on the decisions my species made in regards to the rest of the world, and what it means to sustain a species. At what cost is it acceptable to do so? Etc., etc. It’s just amazing to me that a game that features a rifle with a chainsaw bayonet was able to bring me to tears, and Traviss needed to be given credit for doing so.
Gears of War 3 is not a game vying to be high-art. It is unashamedly a violent and brutal video game. It is the third game of the series and closes the trilogy’s plot, which it does have. Karen Traviss is the writer for this game, but wasn’t for the previous two. She was the author of some tie-in novels for the franchise, which consists of the games and literature – graphic and purely text. Some notable things to mention are that Traviss had never written for a game before and that she had no real knowledge about the franchise when going into writing for it. While she has her opinions on the matter, I want to take a moment and reflect on how important her writing is for the game as compared to the rest of its content.
In a game like this, it’s easy to observe it as two parts – narrative and game. On one side, you have cinematic cut-scenes that give exposition and establish conflicts; on the other, you have a shooting gallery that you complete in order to expose more narrative (if you’re even thinking that big picture). This clear separation between the two fails to capture some of the nuances of video game. For example, oftentimes in Gears of War 3, the characters speak to each other while taking on enemies or scrounging for supplies. Some of these lines of dialogue are very contextual, e.g. “I’m reloading” or “Enemy here!”, etc., but some are devices for characterization – though I would argue that even the seemingly banal remarks of empty clips also contribute. Regardless, some of the dialogue reveals information about character drive and desire as well as worries. These occur within the game space. They thus contribute to narrative. What Traviss has done well with this game is to write those areas well enough so that when players are taken out of the game space, and into cinematic cut-scenes, the characters seem to line up with what the game space established. So, when Cole relives the glory of his Thrashball career during his assault on a group of enemies, it doesn’t seem out-of-place even though it removes the player from active play. This pacing is well done.
The overall arc of the story is intriguing. I say this with a bit of surprise in my voice because I didn’t expect such issues of right to life, exploitation of natural resources, and extinction of species, to be treated with the kind of depth that this genre of game typically has. It was really a fault of presupposing on my part. There are three major species on the planet of Sera – the humans, the locust, and the lambent. The initial conflict was between the first two, and the last creature there came into the picture during the second game and more prominently in the final game of the trilogy. The game is set in an alternative world, which is important when considering how to define the “humans”. They are not really humans so much as established as being the same sort of being as humans. The locust dwell underneath the earth and the lambent are a parasitic being that seek to consume all resources. There is an irony in that all three of these species are vying for resources; each of them is seeking to destroy the others in order to safely collect those resources, to insure their survival. Obviously, it is easiest to side with the humans and that is indeed who the player participates as.
In Gears of War 3 these issues of right to resources are made prescient. While there in previous games, none emphasized it as much. The humans sought out a fuel source which forced the locust from their homes, which started a war. The lambent developed out of the exploitation of the fuel source, as they were the fuel source – a sort of sci-fi Gaia theory, as it were. The final game has all there species coming to a head against each other, with the only solution the humans present is the destruction of the locust and lambent to preserve humanity. Apparently a human sympathizer had been aiding the locusts and began to act as their queen. Through that position she attempted to take the professor Fenix and force him to find a cure that didn’t jeopardize the locust. Fenix failed and enacted his plant anyway.
You play the role of Marcus Fenix, son of that professor. His perspective on the events is limited – he is a simple man with simple objectives: save his life and the lives of others. He doesn’t understand the technology in this world or the politics at work, he is just a soldier and nothing more. This perspective allowed the author, Traviss, to explore these very serious themes without becoming heavy-handed in presentation. Fenix lacks the self-reflection to respond meaningfully to these sorts of questions – mainly because his concerns are more immediate.
But Traviss takes this game that deals with a sort of uber-violence and allows it to be a vessel for a meaningful plot. The game encouraged me personally to reflect on the decisions my species made in regards to the rest of the world, and what it means to sustain a species. At what cost is it acceptable to do so? Etc., etc. It’s just amazing to me that a game that features a rifle with a chainsaw bayonet was able to bring me to tears, and Traviss needed to be given credit for doing so.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)