Recommending Story-first games

[Kallisto]

Do you have any recommendations for good IF games? I have been meaning to get back into IF:s for a long time, but it never happened for some reason or other.

I was going to recommend Attollo to you but it looks like the dev moved to twine (deleting the links to the older version) and the public release of the twine version isn't out until next Saturday for the public. I can prod you again next week with a link, if you want. Once I get your reaction to Attollo, I can better decide if you'd enjoy other IFs I've come across.

I really enjoyed the atmosphere of this one, the characters, and the world building (and as someone who looks at the code when I play, it was surprising the stuff about characters I never would've known because I was never gonna play a certain way to get it...like an early bad end). The game isn't afraid to get bloody or creepy, which is something you might not find a lot on the old medium the game was published under (the Choice of Games demo program, dashingdon). You can choose the gender of your MC and there are 3 female romance options (I assume that's your thing). The only sad thing is that it's a work-in-progress and I think we're only up to chapter 3 still. Also there are two side characters that caught my eye that are not LI's and I will forever be salty about that.

 

[Tlaero]

Maybe the definition of an erotic story game has changed over the years, and I haven't kept up with the times. But, to me, player agency isn't what makes something a "game." What makes something a game is the ability to fail. If it's got player choices that lead to branching paths that have serious consequences for the story, but there's no way to fail, (ala Saving Chloe), it's not a game. It's a bunch of stories mixed together. You can have branching paths in a game, but for it to be a "game," you also need the ability to fail. At least that's how I see things.

Halo is a game. Mass Effect is a game. Chess is a game. Solitaire is a game. A book is not a game. Nor is a jigsaw puzzle. In my youth we used to have "Choose your own adventure" books that were printed books that gave you the agency to make choices and change the story. They were books, not games.

Maybe most people don't want games anymore. Maybe with Renpy's infinite rollback and such, it doesn't even make sense for people to try to make what I'm calling "games" anymore. Certainly, the regular calls for walkthroughs suggests that some people don't want games.

But I see what I make as games (Saving Chloe aside).

I'm very interested in finding new gameplay techniques. I hope we keep talking about bacienvu88's ideas on that front. Here's what I've tried so far:

1) (Dreaming with Elsa, Coming to Grips with Christine) every player dialog has a few ways to be. You can pick the way you want to be through the choices you make, and the game rewards consistency.
2) (Redemption for Jessika) there are 7 different types of player dialog, and you can choose whichever you want at any given point, but the game rewards you when overall you hit a good balance of all of them.
3) (Finding Miranda) You overtly chose your character's history and character type at the start, and then are expected to play "in character" when faced with choices.
4) (Saving Chloe) Branching storyline. Basically no way to fail. Not really a "game" in my book.
5) (Life Changes for Keeley) Kind of a mix of 1 and 4.
6) (Darkness Falls) not a ton of "gameplay" by my definition, but there is at least one investigation or interrogation or something "police-like" in each episode.
7) (Chasing Beth) Small, independent failable scenes. The game rewards you playing as the character I defined up front.

I keep trying new things because I haven't been completely satisfied with any of them. I'm completely open to trying new ones if we come up with something that seems fun and interesting to play while still allowing for a good story. (Player choice is always at odds with story.)

Of course, I've also done something like 20 short stories and a novella that have no choices at all. "No user choice" certainly isn't a "game," but it's a lot easier to write stories that way.

Tlaero

 

[jufot]

Mass Effect is a game.

Is it? The only way to "fail" is to die and go back to a few seconds earlier. It's a minor, noncanonical inconvenience. How is that meaningfully different than RenPy's rollback? The story goes in a singular track regardless.

I'm not sure how I would define what a game is, especially in comparison to other forms of interactive fiction, but being forced to reload a save point isn't it for me.

 

[noping123]

But, to me, player agency isn't what makes something a "game." What makes something a game is the ability to fail.

Player agency isn't what makes it a game, it's just often the gameplay mechanic being used.


I disagree that failure is what makes a game. By the definition you posed (And by the fact that you discounted jigsaw puzzles, which you can technically fail just by not correctly putting pieces together), a LOT of things aren't games. The sims comes to mind as a good example. There really is not a way to "fail" that - I mean your sim could die sure, but that isn't really failure, unless you yourself set an arbitrary goal for the sim to live - which obviously doesn't count by your definition, since in any VN you don't consider a game, you could set arbitrary goals for yourself and then "Fail" them.

I think the only real key component to a game is a level of interactivity - but the idea of failure, is that there are consequences, and I do not think something needs to have consequences to be a game - there doesn't need to be a "win" or a "lose". After all, at their core games are supposed to be fun, entertaining, and sometimes not being able to lose IS fun.

 

[Raife]

Holy smokes! The new _Corporate Culture_ update is out! But I'm not going to have time to play it until Sunday AND I'll have to wait until then to respond to Tlaero's last post (darn adult responsibilities)!

 

[bacienvu88]

Maybe the definition of an erotic story game has changed over the years, and I haven't kept up with the times. But, to me, player agency isn't what makes something a "game." What makes something a game is the ability to fail. If it's got player choices that lead to branching paths that have serious consequences for the story, but there's no way to fail, (ala Saving Chloe), it's not a game. It's a bunch of stories mixed together. You can have branching paths in a game, but for it to be a "game," you also need the ability to fail. At least that's how I see things.

Personally I find defining what a game is to be mainly academic and not overly interesting to discuss. But for me I would turn your definition around and say that a game is about having a goal that the player tries to achieve. And the basic goal is "reach the end screen of the game". Everything before that is just obstacles to reach the end. But more competitive variants are to "beat the opponent".

Halo is a game. Mass Effect is a game. Chess is a game. Solitaire is a game. A book is not a game. Nor is a jigsaw puzzle. In my youth we used to have "Choose your own adventure" books that were printed books that gave you the agency to make choices and change the story. They were books, not games.

You must not have read the same CYOA:s as me. Because those I read (admittedly not very many) definitely had failure states. For example Joe Dever's Lone Wolf series.

Maybe most people don't want games anymore. Maybe with Renpy's infinite rollback and such, it doesn't even make sense for people to try to make what I'm calling "games" anymore. Certainly, the regular calls for walkthroughs suggests that some people don't want games.

I mostly play with walkthroughs (or just reading the rpy files) for VN:s. And often regular games as well. In part it is fear of missing out on the "best" ending. But I also do it to understand what actual paths there are. Also, I don't care overtly about spoilers anyway. A great story gets better the more times you experience it.

But I see what I make as games (Saving Chloe aside).

I'm very interested in finding new gameplay techniques. I hope we keep talking about bacienvu88's ideas on that front. Here's what I've tried so far:

1) (Dreaming with Elsa, Coming to Grips with Christine) every player dialog has a few ways to be. You can pick the way you want to be through the choices you make, and the game rewards consistency.
2) (Redemption for Jessika) there are 7 different types of player dialog, and you can choose whichever you want at any given point, but the game rewards you when overall you hit a good balance of all of them.
3) (Finding Miranda) You overtly chose your character's history and character type at the start, and then are expected to play "in character" when faced with choices.
4) (Saving Chloe) Branching storyline. Basically no way to fail. Not really a "game" in my book.
5) (Life Changes for Keeley) Kind of a mix of 1 and 4.
6) (Darkness Falls) not a ton of "gameplay" by my definition, but there is at least one investigation or interrogation or something "police-like" in each episode.
7) (Chasing Beth) Small, independent failable scenes. The game rewards you playing as the character I defined up front.

I keep trying new things because I haven't been completely satisfied with any of them. I'm completely open to trying new ones if we come up with something that seems fun and interesting to play while still allowing for a good story. (Player choice is always at odds with story.)

Of course, I've also done something like 20 short stories and a novella that have no choices at all. "No user choice" certainly isn't a "game," but it's a lot easier to write stories that way.

Tlaero

I really liked what you did with Redemption for Jessika. Mainly because the MC doesn't look so static as he does in Finding Miranda. However, the consequence is that the MC feels like he has no real character instead.I liked the Friend vs Love part of Life changes for Keeley. And of course seeing the same thing from two perspectives. Darkness Falls indeed does not have much "gameplay" and unfortunately the major choice never had a chance to get an actual consequence. But I think it is fine to have few choices but those that are there should then be significant. There is no single thing that is right, only what fits a particular story.

Regarding game mechanics. It is a rather difficult problem (which isn't that surprising, if I could find it, someone else should have already found it ). But my gut feeling says that it should involve more consequences in the form of disabling options based on previous choices. Or adding new ones. Maybe mainstream CRPG

You must be registered to see the links

is something to take inspiration from? It did some interesting stuff with dialogue.

But there is also the choices devs make in what stories to tell. Most stories on this site are quite pandering to the player. It would be interesting to have a story where no matter how many "right" choices you make, it doesn't work out with the LI. Or what Raife talked about with success in pursing an LI leads to failure in some other aspects and vice versa. Or MC breaks down trying to manage his harem . There are also entirely too few really good bad endings in VN:s (the best one IMO is in Summer Scent).

 

[bacienvu88]

Is it? The only way to "fail" is to die and go back to a few seconds earlier. It's a minor, noncanonical inconvenience. How is that meaningfully different than RenPy's rollback? The story goes in a singular track regardless.

I'm not sure how I would define what a game is, especially in comparison to other forms of interactive fiction, but being forced to reload a save point isn't it for me.

It is even clearer for Dark Souls since that game doesn't have a fail state at all. Death just make you respawn and lose a bit of progress, that could be regained.

 

[realjitter]

I played the game https://f95zone.to/threads/the-theater-of-sinners-v0-1-alpha-justxthings.117916/

And this one was interesting to say the least. I went from wanting to delete it right away to really liking it at the end of chapter 1. The reason why i wanted to delete it was because the beginning of it is very cliche, filled with all the things you'd expect from a game like that with all it's tags. It's about bullying, mental issues, sexual harrasment, corruption, blackmail, humiliation, submission and sexual desires/fantasies.

The world (as of now) basically consists only of sick, despicable, depraved, fuck up, creepy fucks =) Which is usually not what i like to read about and if i do it has to be done in an interesting way. Furthermore it has to convince me that all that is shown in the game is not only there for the sake of pure voyeurism. Aka it has to have a good story supporting everything and making it at least somewhat believable...

So does it have that, does it have a good story? Well, that remains to be seen because this is only the first version of it and with that many heavy topics a story like this can spiral into super nonsense stuff very fast, especially when the developer introduces physical violence, bdsm and whatnot later on...

But so far i liked it, i really liked it actually. It has this certain layer of psychological depth to it which i found intriguing. The whole dynamic and connection between the 3 female MC's is well done and sets up alot of possibilities for the future. It'll be interesting to see what the Dev will come up with. May favourite scenes so far was all the Abby stuff and also the Abby "confronts" Rebeca scene...lots of potential here without spoiling anything...

So... if you like darker themed stories which can make you very umcomfortable at times. If you don't mind femdom/maledom/humiliation and so on. Or if you're simply open minded and don't care that much what you read this game might be right up your alley even with all it's flaws.

I mean, let's be honest here, all the creepy, old, fat fucks in the game deserve nothing other than getting their dicks shot off with a shotgun..That being said though, I still send Paula down the rabbit hole, sorry Paula

 

[jufot]

So, Oathbreaker 2 has ended today, and in a way I absolutely did not see coming. Rin (the dev) must have planned this years in advance, when she started the first game, and I'm just in awe of what she has accomplished. It's one of the best pieces of fantasy fiction I've read in years.

I've always respected writers who are willing to leave major threads to the reader's imagination. It's a risky move - if you don't get it juuust right, it'll leave the audience deeply frustrated. Oathbreaker doesn't hold your hand, refuses to tie everything up with a bow, and yet delivers a very satisfying ending. I shouldn't have been surprised by this, given how much I adore her sci-fi epic Cardinal Cross, but Rin has somehow exceeded my already lofty expectations.

If anyone would like to give it a shot, I recommend going in blind. There is no walkthrough I'm aware of, and you shouldn't look for one. Make choices that feel right to you, and let the story develop organically.

Oh, one more thing! In a brilliant instance of serendipity, this last chapter of Oathbreaker addressed something we've been discussing above - the ability to fail, and it's relevance and importance for a game. Saying anything more would veer into spoiler territory, and I'm not that cruel

I've already had Oathbreaker 2 in the OP, but I'll use this opportunity to add the first game and Cardinal Cross to the list as well.

 

[Tlaero]

But there is also the choices devs make in what stories to tell. Most stories on this site are quite pandering to the player. It would be interesting to have a story where no matter how many "right" choices you make, it doesn't work out with the LI.

Way back when I did Coffee for Keisha, in the afterward for one of the two paths, I had the characters break up when they moved to different countries. My thought was, "It's not like everyone you date turns out to be the one who you stay with forever."

But, man, did I ever get a visceral reaction to it.

Then there's the movie, "The Breakup." The title of the movie says they're not going to stay together, and STILL audiences hated that they broke up.

I'm pretty sure that games where you're required to "lose" will not do well.

I mean, sure, tell the story you want to tell. But we developers spend way too much of our free time (most of it) creating these games. If everyone hates the game, it's hard to justify the time spent. And I'm not even talking about money, since I don't make any from my games. (I give it all to Mortze.)

Tlaero

 

[TheimmortalP]

You must not have read the same CYOA:s as me. Because those I read (admittedly not very many) definitely had failure states. For example Joe Dever's Lone Wolf series.

I also wanna add onto this that I read the literal Choose Your Own Adventure books as a kid, like a LOT of them, and they had failure states too. There were a lot of endings where you'd get killed, they just explained it in a very pg rated way. For example there's this one about you becoming Bigfoot, and in one of the endings you get shot by a hunter, and you make the sound of a dying animal, and you're in denial and think it's something else making the noise.

 

[Tlaero]

Yeah, we read the same books. Would you say that they were games though? I'm not saying that anything that can be failed is a game. I'm saying that the ability to fail is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for a game. There are lots of things you can fail at that aren't games.

The point about the Sims is a good one. But, while I enjoyed Sim City, I never liked the Sims. I always found it boring. I've never really thought about it, but maybe I didn't consider it a game.

As for Mass Effect, I disagree that the checkpoint system makes it not be a game. If that's so, then anything that allows you to save and restore isn't a game. In Mass Effect, if you don't shoot correctly, you fail and have to try again. To me, that's morally equivalent to an erotic game where, if you don't act correctly, you fail and have to try again.

Note, however, that I'm NOT saying that "Choose your own adventure" style erotic stories are bad. I'm rather proud of Saving Chloe. I'm just saying that they're not, by at least my self-imposed definition, "games."

Probably part of my trouble, though, is that I'm trying to add gameplay mechanics to a story. It's probably easier to add a story to an existing game. Of course, I was a writer before I was a software developer. I don't know. I'll keep trying.

Tlaero

 

[bacienvu88]

Way back when I did Coffee for Keisha, in the afterward for one of the two paths, I had the characters break up when they moved to different countries. My thought was, "It's not like everyone you date turns out to be the one who you stay with forever."

But, man, did I ever get a visceral reaction to it.

Then there's the movie, "The Breakup." The title of the movie says they're not going to stay together, and STILL audiences hated that they broke up.

I'm pretty sure that games where you're required to "lose" will not do well.

I mean, sure, tell the story you want to tell. But we developers spend way too much of our free time (most of it) creating these games. If everyone hates the game, it's hard to justify the time spent. And I'm not even talking about money, since I don't make any from my games. (I give it all to Mortze.)

Tlaero

I completely understand that it is not rewarding to work on games that people hate. People still like to complain about that event in Acting Lessons, but the game is still one of the top rated games despite that. And people complain about that bad ending in Summer Scent that I find to be very good.

It was too long ago that I played Coffee for Keisha, so don't remember much of it. But from your description of it I don't really see the problem. Maybe it was because it is in the afterword and it destroyed whatever future the players had imagined for the couple?

I am also not saying everything needs to be gloom and doom. It is just the implication of "MC pursues LI => courtship successful => happiness and sunshine all round" that I would like to not always be true. I mean, some of the thrill and excitement of pursuing an LI is lost, because I as the player know that the MC will be successful.

Probably part of my trouble, though, is that I'm trying to add gameplay mechanics to a story. It's probably easier to add a story to an existing game. Of course, I was a writer before I was a software developer. I don't know. I'll keep trying.

I am not sure that would be better actually. Often in AAA games, game mechanics take precedence over story and the writer have to make some semblance of story anyway. I remember Rhianna Pratchett was much criticized for Rise of the Tomb Raider, where in game play Lara Croft is a cold blooded murderer who kills without blinking. But the story paints a very different picture of Lara as someone who is unused to kill etc. But Rhianna didn't have much leeway to write a sensible story given the game mechanics. And that sort of thing is very common in mainstream games.

The ideal is of course game mechanics and story that complements each other. But that is not very easy to achieve.

 

[Tlaero]

Often in mainstream games, the story is added on and fairly separate. Like when you find audio logs that let you piece together what happened. I've always liked those a ton. I remember the star crossed lovers story from System Shock much better than I remember the rest of the game. But, for people who just want to shoot aliens, they don't have to listen to the logs. Maybe that's the equivalent of having a "Walkthrough mode" in story games. People who just want the story and don't care for the added on and fairly separate gameplay can mostly skip it.

Even though I've got a walkthrough mode in Toro 7, I don't think I would have come to that realization without this discussion. Thanks!

Tlaero

 

[Vasin]

This made me think of Life is Strange, a game that is literally built on the inability to fail as you have the power to rewind time. Yet when your plant withers because you forgot to water it, is it failure or just another "story state"?

 

[Tlaero]

I didn't get very far with the original Life is Strange, but I liked the first few chapters of Tell Me Why. I should go see if more has been released. I've got the new colors version of Life is Strange on my xbox "Play Later" list, though.

I do feel that, "Do it wrong, fail, and rewind time to try again" counts as "ability to fail" though. Failure consequences don't have to be onerous, there just needs to be a wrong and a right.

Although, judging from the people who couldn't get through Chasing Beth, despite the fact that in a given checkpoint there usually were only a few choices, and on failure, people came on the screen and told you what you did wrong, it's clear that some people don't want games.

Tlaero

 

[bacienvu88]

I didn't get very far with the original Life is Strange, but I liked the first few chapters of Tell Me Why. I should go see if more has been released. I've got the new colors version of Life is Strange on my xbox "Play Later" list, though.

I do feel that, "Do it wrong, fail, and rewind time to try again" counts as "ability to fail" though. Failure consequences don't have to be onerous, there just needs to be a wrong and a right.

Although, judging from the people who couldn't get through Chasing Beth, despite the fact that in a given checkpoint there usually were only a few choices, and on failure, people came on the screen and told you what you did wrong, it's clear that some people don't want games.

Tlaero

But it is not failure in that sense (although that actually exist as well in Life is Strange). It is the MC, the character that goes back in time. And most of the time she is required to experience the future and then go back in time so she knows what path to take, i.e. it is not possible to succeed the first time around.

 

[Tlaero]

Twelve Minutes was that way too. You couldn't possibly figure it out the first time through the time loop. You had to learn things from one pass and use them on the next. But you still had to figure things out. And if you didn't figure things out, you'd get stuck.

Tlaero

 

[Vasin]

Getting stuck is not failing, it's not succeeding. Realistically, when we're talking about "gameplay" the definition is quite simple - it's when we're acting within a certain ruleset to achieve a specific goal. People play games not to fail, but to succeed, the whole point is that the challenge is manufactured to be surmountable. The only way to truly "fail" at the game is to stop playing, any other "failure" can always be regarded as a story state.

 

[jufot]

Alright, I have another strong recommendation! There isn't much of a story, so it won't go on the list, but it's so, very good. Meet Camp Klondike!

The first thing you'll notice is the graphics. It's... well, it's a mix of Microsoft Paint and clipart from Office 97 It feels weird at first, but I'd urge you to push through. It fits the atmosphere well, and the experience is greatly enhanced by animations and sound effects.

What's it about, then? It's a summer camp for college-aged boys and girls. Klondike is run by a strict headmistress who does not want shenanigans in her domain. Obviously, horny teenagers have other plans. Some (like our MC) are new to the camp, and some have known each other for years, allowing for some interesting dynamics. The writing is quite good, and often hilarious.

So far, so ordinary. What makes the game special is how it cares for its characters. At its core, Klondike is an exploration of sexuality and kink. It does so with humour, realism and finesse, without resorting to cheap objectification.

There are scant concessions for porn logic, if any. The girls are almost all sexually experienced to various degrees, while MC's experience is limited to being on the cover of a sex manual and some... unfortunate attempts at exploration with aquatic equipment Some girls have boyfriends, some are interested in boys other than the MC (!), and most are willing to talk about their sexual history - in graphic detail - around a campfire, with plenty of alcohol as social lubricant.

One of my biggest pet-peeves in AVNs is the poor quality of sex writing. Watching characters repeatedly smash their bits does absolutely nothing for me. You could create the most intricate, photorealistic renders, but without eroticism I'll likely yawn and fast-forward. Klondike gets eroticism right. One girl narrates her extremely hot experience about getting fucked on a nude beach, another enjoys mutual masturbation with the MC in the wee hours of the night, yet another has some rough play time with the MC in a cave. Kinks are explored, voyeurs and exhibitionists discover themselves.

And everything happens without reducing anyone to their body parts. These are people who care about being seen and understood, not merely used. They communicate. Boundaries exist, and are respected. One of the girl's first sex scene with the MC includes a quick chat about how exactly she likes and doesn't like to be touched. Such a stark contrast to the "just stick it in" we've come to expect. Condoms are a thing! MC and a girl decide not to go for PIV despite being very much in the heat of the moment because they realize neither of them brought a condom.

It's not just MC's interactions, either. One of the girls - the one closest to MC - helps out another guy in a sexual situation. It's meant as an act of kindness for a friend, is received as such, and no one gets jealous or possessive. Yet another guy has feelings for yet another girl, and MC plays wingman to both. Some girls are actual lesbians (not "men with breasts", as Tlaero would say), and have no interest in the MC.

I could go on and on, but this is already long enough. I'll leave you with one of my favourite bits from the game so far