My thesis – titled Time, Space and Interface: Reframing dialogue design for better flow – explored three different frameworks from game studies academia. The first two frameworks – Wei, Bizzocchi and Calvert’s categories of time and space – are used to understand games from a narratological perspective; the third – Kristine Jorgensons’ gameworld interface theory – breaks down game interfaces into ontological frames.
Time can be categorised as:
- Order
- Linear
- Non-linear
- Speed
- Scene
- Summary
- Stretch
- Ellipsis
- Pause
- Frequency
- Singular
- Repetitive
- Iterative
Space can be broken down into:
- Topographical space
- Layouts
- Spatial oppositions
- Operational space
- Character/object mobility
- Paths and axes
- Presentational space
- On-screen/off-screen
- Acoustic space
- Perspective
- Spatial segmentation
- Screen interface
Jorgenson’s gameworld interface theory posits three pairs of interrelational frames:
- Integrated
- Superimposed
- Fictional
- Ludic
- Ecological
- Emphatic
These frameworks are applied by their creators to games generally; my thesis sought to apply them specifically to the design of dialogue systems and sequences, using three case studies (Signs of the Sojourner, Oxenfree and We Should Talk) to evidence this application.
The result of these case studies was a number of design ‘recommendations’ or ‘possibilities’ – areas which I felt dialogue designers have yet to fully explore, and which might yield opportunities for innovation, or at least a break from the ‘standard dialogue meta’ also identified in my thesis.
- Time
- Frequency (singular) – despite the prevalence of duologues (plays between two people) in theatre, games writers have seemed reluctant to explore a singular dialogue system that might represent two people talking for an entire game. Perhaps this is a function of games designers leaning into the format’s strengths, multiple characters being cheaper to add than live performers are to hire, but a game of significant length staging a conversation between only two characters feels oddly radical.
- Frequency (repetitive) – innovation can often be found in pushing traditional concepts to their limits, and a game which locks a player into a repeating dialogue sequence that they must learn to escape might have quite the diachronous effect.
- Speed (stretch) – Signs of the Sojourner has shown how powerful slowing down a player’s experience of dialogue can be; using stretch to increase a player’s reaction time even further, maybe encouraging the reading of body language in animated characters or the close analysis of, as in We Should Talk, clauses or even individual words, might be a productive path.
- Space
- Layout (parallel) – despite the existence of split-screen gaming, one layout barely touched upon in dialogue design is parallel. An interactive fiction version could be easily prototyped using Ink, in which, say, two conversations progress down either side of the screen and it is up to the players how long they remain ‘in control’ of each one. Alternatively, choices in one could ‘rewrite’ the other, as when films flash back to show a different perspective on events.
- Spatial opposition – as raised in this paper, a system for the procedural varying of line length and dialogue shape could easily be developed. A ‘stamina’ system could fuel the length or intensity of a player’s lines (more stamina required to deliver longer lines), and the dialogue system could respond by matching intensity during ‘rising’ action and opposing it during conflict.
- Spatial segmentation – though identified in this paper as a site of flow disruption, a possible solution to this might be to maximise the feeling of segmentation rather than minimise it. The first act of the game might not include a dialogue system at all – maybe it’s an exploration of a dream-like 3D environment; the second might be only a dialogue system, reflecting on the player’s experience in the first; the third could unify the two, or return to the first but inflected with information from the second.
- Interface
- Integrated, fictional, ecological – dialogue systems that evince these interface frames are few and far between, but perhaps, given recent advances in shader technology, it might be possible for a game’s dialogue to be delivered as a texture on a 3D environment. Gone Home (The Fullbright Company, 2013), but with the found text written on every object in the house; a player might interact by ‘writing’ their character’s inner monologue onto the surface, marking the house with their own thoughts.
- Integrated, ludic, emphatic – a dialogue system that stages the process of editing, making each word a game piece that might be interacted with by the player/editor in some way – red strikethrough for a suggested cut, green highlighter for an enthusiastic remark. The next draft returns with certain changes made, others not, and the palimpsestic effect of these sequences builds up a relationship between the player/editor and the writer over time, although they never directly speak.
Over the next week, I will draft rough game pitches in response to some of these recommendations, and hopefully identify a final project on which to work!
References:
Echodog Games (2020) Signs of the Sojourner [Video game]. Echodog Games.
Jorgenson, K. (2013) Gameworld Interfaces. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Mertz, C. (2018) We Should Talk [Video game]. Mertz, C.
Night School Studio (2016). Oxenfree [Video game]. Night School Studio.
Wei, H., Bizzocchi, J. & Calvert, T. (2010) “Time and Space in Digital Game Storytelling” in International Journal of Computer Games Technology, Vol 2010.