The gaming short story (or, the Short Game)
Though I play a lot of games, I finish relatively few of them. Often this is simply because I feel I have exhausted most of what a game has to offer before it is even close to being complete. Most games seem as though they last as long as they do either because that is what gamers want (at least, what the small contingent of forum-dwelling hardcore gamers want, or think they want) or because they are such expensive products, not because they actually have ten or twenty or thirty or sixty hours of genuinely fresh and entertaining gameplay packed inside.
Some games are all about breadth over depth, about exploration over linearity, but there are still not all too many of those that need to be as huge as they are. They also give gamers ammunition for slamming shorter games. (”I played Oblivion and GTA: San Andreas for three hundred hours each,” one might exclaim, “so why would I pay $60 for BioShock?”) I am glad games like this exist, but they should clearly not be any length benchmark for different types of games. Multiplayer games are obviously a different beast entirely.
For years, I have been hoping for games that are cheaper, more densely packed, and on the whole shorter. Many of my most memorable gaming experiences have come from such games, and this is surely at least in part because those are the games I actually finished–Beyond Good & Evil, Ico, Full Throttle, and so on. Still, these are full-budget games with essentially full single-player experiences and full prices. It seems like there could be something else.
In late 2006, Telltale Games began releasing its Sam & Max series. Modeled after television, the episodes are released roughly monthly and run a couple hours each. Developed and distributed in “seasons,” the individual games are shorter and cheaper. Telltale seems to be the only company successfully pulling the strategy off at the moment, although Hothead with its Penny Arcade games and DeathSpank from industry legend Ron Gilbert (Monkey Island, Maniac Mansion) would like to get in on that action.
Valve tried episodic too, and while I have loved Half-Life 2: Episode One and Episode Two, company employees seem to agree they’re not really episodes so much as…chapters, or something. I just think of them as smaller games as this point, which is fine. They are closer to what I had been hoping for–they have the gameplay density of a full game (and are even denser in many ways) and are a little lengthier than “episodes,” and can still be completed in a sitting if you desire–but that video game industry-esque inevitability of sequels still makes them sort of episodic.
Enter Portal.
Yeah, everyone’s said everything about Portal already, because it is amazing and pretty much deserves to have things said about it endlessly. Really, it’s the only game I ever want to talk about, but people keep reminding me there are “other games.” Like No More Heroes. Go buy it.
So, Portal. I don’t know whether its length was a matter of mitigating potential risk, a factor of development time and budget, a way of establishing a franchise, the intention to introduce a new gameplay mechanic to the Half-Life series in an appealing and compact wrapper, none of the above, some of the above, or all of the above. What I do know is that it feels like the progenitor of a new gaming format: the gaming short story (or, briefly, the “short game”).
Though it exists within the fiction of the Half-Life universe, Portal is completely self-sufficient, a wonderfully-paced and constantly enjoyable gaming adventure. Its narrative arc and gameplay arc are complementary and, unlike those of many games, very fresh. Playing it gives me a similar feeling to watching a short film or reading a short story. Though it takes longer to play than a short film does to watch, its relative length compared to other examples of its medium gives it a compact and succinct feel.
This seems like the ideal format for developers who have multiple games in the pipeline and are looking for ways to offset full production of one project with pre-production of another, with the possibility of alternate revenue streams when the big game is still a year or more away, while testing riskier gameplay concepts that are clearly fun and worthwhile but perhaps not yet massaged into full-sized game potential.
From the gamer’s perspective–particularly from the grown, employed, busy gamer’s perspective–having many such games available would be wonderful. Numerous games available relatively cheaply, with the guarantee that you’ll be able to reach the end in an amount of time equivalent to a few movies, seems like a win/win.
I also love the idea of game writers being able to experiment with stories that are concise and entirely self-contained. The great majority of story-driven games have more plot than story, more text than meaningful dialogue, more backstory than substance. The desire to see tightly-told game narratives not always obviously set up for sequels may be more of a pipe dream than wishing for more gaming short stories, but I figure it’ll happen eventually.
Has anyone else referred to gaming short stories in this context? I’d like to say I coined it. Maybe try going to GameStop and asking where their gaming short story shelf is, then when they said they don’t know what the hell you are talking about, you can ask all exasperated. Eventually, it’ll be in industry style guides everywhere.
Tags: episodic gaming, portal, telltale, valve
February 8th, 2008 at 11:34 am
I agree; in fact, I wrote a thing about it http://fullbright.blogspot.com/2007/11/length.html
The conflict is between the range of unique interactions versus the volume of included content. If I only require four hours to fully absorb a game’s range of interactions, the content of that game should only take four hours to fully play out (see: Portal.) Super Mario Galaxy is one of the few recent games that really justifies its 20+ hour length; new, novel mechanics are introduced at a constant rate over the entire length of the campaign. Playing through to the end doesn’t feel redundant.
February 8th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Good points. One additional point of frustration for me in a lot of full-length games is disposable interaction - essentially a skill you learn along the way but never revisit or apply to a different situation.
Take Half-Life 2 for example. Both the buggy and airboat sections interactions were never revisited once they were initially completed. I would have enjoyed shorter sequences to intro the gameplay and then revisiting them later in the game with additional challenges and/or puzzles thrown in. To me, they seemed ripe for a later chase sequence or something.
February 8th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Amazing that your “finished game” list reads almost exactly like mine. BG&E, Ico, Full Throttle, Portal are all games I finished, along with recent games like Katamari Damacy and Phoenix Wright. Games I didn’t finish includes almost everything that takes more than 12 or so hours to play, including HL 1 + 2, Metroid Prime 1 + 3, GTA 3 + GTA:SA…
I would much rather pay $20 to get an enjoyable game I can play from start to finish than $50 hours on something that I’m never going to get through.
I can play 60+ hours of things like Picross and Civ IV, though I’m not sure why that is. I think it’s because I get bored of the “story” in many of the games like GTA3, or forget what I’m supposed to be doing, and just put the game down, never to pick it up again.
February 8th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
I’ve been thinking about this myself, especially this last year. It sounds weird, but some of the games I count among my absolute favorites are ones I couldn’t get myself to play long enough to finish. Baldur’s Gate 2 and Planescape Torment specifically come to mind. Dragon Quest 8 was also a blast for a couple of days before I just couldn’t justify putting any more time into it.
And yeah, it’s been said to death but Portal was incredibly satisfying.
February 9th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
i have to say, games that are expansive and take hundreds of hours rarely even get started by me. i have such trouble finding enough time in sequence to finish them while remembering what the fuck i started off doing… i fall into games that can be played sporadically, and in iterations, like guitar hero, rock band, or even advance wars lately… where it’s about the gameplay, not the story. as sometimes i’ll go a month between sessions, and the story lacks there.
yet something like portal, or sam and max, where you can just sit down and in a day or two play it, without guilt of “wasting money” on an “unfinished experience” or worrying about your time commitments…
i’m going to not only go to gamestop, i’m heading out to best buy’s gaming short story shelf.
February 9th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
IAWTP
February 9th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
I’m with dahanese (and yourself). If it’s a huge game I tend to not even get started though or feel so disjointed when I do play due to the months in between that it’s just not satisfying.
As such I’ve started to enjoy gameplay based games (as opposed to story based) simply for the ability to jump in and out of the game anytime, and still enjoy it even after months of no play.
That said, I completely miss the experience of being told a really good story. I think that’s were Portal breaks new ground. It’s the first game that on one hand is a sort of gameplay experiment, but on the other hand it’s telling a fantastic story during that experiment.
This mix makes it the first game I’ve cleared through in a very, very long time. And the first one that had me grinning like a fool as I beat it even longer. We need more of this blend. It was completely refreshing.
TLDR: Me too. I want to be able to pick up a game that’s the equivalent of David Sedaris’ Barrel Fever (A small compilation of short stories that can be digested quickly).
February 9th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
I enjoy an experience for the experience. Whether it be a short experience or a long experience. What it comes down to ( for me ) is how well the development team knows how to successfully keep drawing the player into the experience.
After games like ZeldaWW or Metroid Prime 123, Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Gothic 3, Thief123, Commandos 1&2, Baldurs Gate 1&2 I still was wanting more from that story, that experience even though the play time on my side was enormous ( I love to explore ever nook and cranny ).
Shorter games HL:EP1 & 2, Portal, Sin Ep1, ect were as equally enjoying to me, but at the same time frustrating. For the simple reason I wanted more from the experience. After Finishing HL:EP1 & 2, I said to myself, “That’s it?”.
Now, I’m not an “average gamer”, I would gladly sit down 2-3 nights a week and plug 3-5 hours in a game over the course of a couple weeks to finish it. The average gamer/consumer more than likely, would not. I see the appeal to shorter experiences ( lower budgets, more concentrated action, appealing to a bigger audience, not a deep time sink for the player ect ), but I hope it doesn’t turn into a trend of nothing but 5-8 hour long games…
From your standpoint, or anyone else who works in the industry, I can see how longer games are less appealing. Especially with the plethora of games being churned out, it has to be hard to find the time to review and report about them or simply enjoy them… especially when you have deadlines to stick to, get your game out the door, or have your review up ect ect.
I absolutely love cooking. I used to cook at home on a nightly basis. When I started to work in kitchens, and eventually run them, I’m now looking for easy ways and ideas to make dinner. No more 3-5 course meals… just something to quickly sautee and enjoy.
All in All
I still want my 20-40 hour RPGs and Action Adventures. If done well, the longer experiences are something nothing else in the entertainment industry can compare to, except possibly for an epic novel.
February 11th, 2008 at 10:20 am
I think you’re right on the money. Basically, what we want is some really good interactive fiction, yeah? An experience where story and interactivity meet halfway, and from which new dynamics (like we have barely seen) are born. It seems like developers are still taking too much for granted when they design a game, infusing it with bits of narrative that are secondary (at the most) to the experience. Shouldn’t it be the other way around? Let the story inspire design decisions.. let it inspire the pace, mood, perspective, controls, choices, etc.
I don’t know if ‘gaming short story’ is really something you want to take credit for, because it’s only natural to term a game that is both short and story-driven with the words (and in no particular order) short, story and game. That being said, you are one of my favorite advocates of this wicked and necessary movement, so I would be happy to see such a credit, if it can exist, perhaps fall somewhere near you.
Keep it up, Remo.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
I agree with you and everyone else here.
Even for movies, I only watch about 30 - 45 min per night and I finish a movie in a 3 - 4 nights that way. I would love to do that with a game.
I think “Gaming Short Story” has promise. I’d prefer to call it a “Short Story Game”. Calling it “Short Game” could include games that don’t have any narrative elements.
February 12th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Portal very much feels like the gaming equivalent of a short story. I REALLY hope more developers consider aiming for this. I also hope they realize that the importance of quality and refinement in short stories parallels with such games.
IF Portal had been rough on the edges, or lacked notably in a few areas, it just would have been another “episodic” oddity passing under the radar.
Instead, it had a horde of us screaming GOTY.
February 13th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
I wonder how much less money shorter games cost to develop, if you don’t already have a non-short game to draw from. The Half-Life episodes are basically stand-alone expansion packs using a lot of existing technology and art. If you are an independent developer with a new idea, it would be hard to make it into a game with the quality of Portal without the resources Valve had at its disposal.
Portal was also released in a bundle making its individual success harder to judge. It, too, can be considered a Half-Life 2 expansion pack. An unusually innovative one.
February 14th, 2008 at 6:44 am
Tigen: Those are good points! I’ll bet a short game, if it were story based and using modern technology, would still take quite a long time to develop. There is a LOT of waste in the industry. The process is often backwards and inefficient, which is the unfortunate nature of things that become ‘big budget’… and projects developed in this way are sucked dry of any sort of artistic integrity and balance. Really, that is why I’m so much in support of Independent studios… I literally feel nothing when I play most games.
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:31 pm
[...] short. I say it didn’t wear out its welcome. It did what it needed to do, and it was done. Like Portal. I rarely finish games, because they rarely have much to say in the gameplay arena (and certainly [...]