Ren'Py Struggling with Branching Storytelling

[IJustWantToAskQuestions]

I’m currently working on the story of my game and I’ve finished Episode 1. Before going much further, there’s an important topic I really need to sort out: routes.

From what I’ve seen, most successful games have branching stories. The only successful kinetic one that comes to mind right now is Cosy Café. Of course, there may be others, but most of the well-known titles rely on branching. That’s why I feel like I should do the same.

Here’s my problem: I don’t have much experience with games that feature multiple routes. No matter how many routes a game has, I personally only play one of them and then move on with my life. If a game does have multiple good routes (for example Being a DIK), I usually just use mods or cheats to experience everything on the same save file. Because of that, I can’t say I fully understand the logic behind branching stories. That’s what I want to learn, and that’s the reason I’m making this post.

There’s also the technical side, of course. I honestly have no idea how to code a story with multiple routes, but that’s a problem for another day. For now, I just want to understand the concept. I explained my plan in the spoiler section. If you want, you can skip that part and go straight to the question I asked.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

So that’s my plan. What I’d really like is advice from people who enjoy games with multiple routes and branching stories. Do you think it’s better to attempt branching even if it risks being weak, or is it safer to just make a kinetic novel? If I go kinetic, the downside is clear: some people will see “kinetic” and immediately pass on the game. On the upside, I won’t get criticized for “pretending” to be branching when I’m not.

If I try branching and fail, I’m afraid people will say: “This game claims it’s branching but it’s basically kinetic, I hate it.”
That’s the scenario I want to avoid most.


So I’m torn. In your opinion, is it better to have a weakly branching story than none at all? Or should I stick with kinetic if I can’t do branching properly?


Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

 

[Winterfire]

You believe there are either routes or kinetic, that couldn't be further from the truth. You can have a harem where you date all the women in a single playthrough, but still have choices that affect the story. You could make a choice where a heroine dies, but you meet another one later on. You could make a choice where you gain a lot of money and move to a different bigger house which lets you unlock different sex scenes, you could decide to stay behind to have sex with Woman A, or choose to go to the gym and meet another new woman (not a main route, but a side character) and have sex with her instead. There are many possibilities, routes are only a small part of it.

 

[IJustWantToAskQuestions]

You believe there are either routes or kinetic, that couldn't be further from the truth. You can have a harem where you date all the women in a single playthrough, but still have choices that affect the story. You could make a choice where a heroine dies, but you meet another one later on. You could make a choice where you gain a lot of money and move to a different bigger house which lets you unlock different sex scenes, you could decide to stay behind to have sex with Woman A, or choose to go to the gym and meet another new woman (not a main route, but a side character) and have sex with her instead. There are many possibilities, routes are only a small part of it.

Maybe I used the wrong words. I mean kinetic novels and everything else. I'm just trying to find the right formula.

 

[Winterfire]

Maybe I used the wrong words. I mean kinetic novels and everything else. I'm just trying to find the right formula.

In that case, usually it's both. You don't use only one option individually...

Point system restricts the players' freedom because they are pushed to pick an option that they may not want to pick just to have that extra point. This is usually done when each answer gives a different effect... For instance, in Being a DIK, you can be a DIK, or a chick. Both do different things and they're equally good in terms of unlocking content. If your game has 1 right answer and the rest is a trap, then you don't need this.

Picking the route is the best option, because you can let the player decide if they're interested in a woman or not. Even if you make a harem game, it's not guaranteed that the player wants all of the women, giving them a way to exclude characters they don't like is good.

However, even if you pick the route option, keeping tracks of points is a good thing to do regardless. I just wouldn't restrict it to choices if you don't offer equally good choices. You can still gain points by performing other actions (such as interactions).

 

[anne O'nymous]

Point system restricts the players' freedom because they are pushed to pick an option that they may not want to pick just to have that extra point.

I have to correct you here: Badly implemented point system restricts the players' freedom.

But it's totally possible to have if love >= 5 in place of the, yes restricting, if love == 7.
Globally speaking, a 20%, decreasing to 10% while the game progress, variation in regard of the maximal value is a reasonable approach. More, and the girl wouldn't have reason to act that way; you've been too much of a jerk to love you "this much". Less, it would be actually restricting, not really letting place to a more independent playthrough.

By the way, for OP, he should read this how-to.

Edit: typo.

 

[Winterfire]

I have to correct you here: Badly implemented point system restricts the players' freedom.

But it's totally possible to have if love > 5 in place of the, yes restricting, if love == 7.

That doesn't even make sense to me, and it wasn't my point.

If you want to date Character A, but there's only one choice that raises her love, and what you want to say is something that does nothing or even decreases it, you're restricting the player's freedom to roleplay.

As for the example, you never do "==", but ">=" because otherwise you risk of locking yourself out of scenes (or even the whole game if it's a requirement) only because you have 8 instead of 7. That wouldn't restrict the players' freedom, but it would simply be bad game design that restrict you from playing the game as a whole, in the worst case scenario.

Either way, I did say that you can use both, but you have to put yourself in the player's shoes. It's very easy to make a frustrating game, or one that requires a walkthrough to progress.

 

[anne O'nymous]

If you want to date Character A, but there's only one choice that raises her love, and what you want to say is something that does nothing or even decreases it, you're restricting the player's freedom to roleplay.

Not if you don't strictly limits to the max value.

20% of the value mean that over 5 choices, you can pick one that do not raise her love, what is relatively realistic. If you don't show a minimum of interest for her, why should she fall in love? Something that especially matters at the starts of the game.
She's not here at the player disposal, waiting for him to notice that she's fuckable. If the MC pass half his time ignoring her, she have no reason to fall in love.

As for the example, you never do "==", but ">="

Well, apparently you would be surprised to see the number of games that use "==", precisely because the whole game rely on maxed points.

 

[Insomnimaniac Games]

Strictly choice-based VNs are poopy.

 

[Winterfire]

Not if you don't strictly limits to the max value.

20% of the value mean that over 5 choices, you can pick one that do not raise her love, what is relatively realistic. If you don't show a minimum of interest for her, why should she fall in love? Something that especially matters at the starts of the game.
She's not here at the player disposal, waiting for him to notice that she's fuckable. If the MC pass half his time ignoring her, she have no reason to fall in love.

I am not arguing that, as I've said previously, my point is that all choices should have an effect.
Having a choice that does good, and all the rest that does nothing or is bad forces the player to use a walkthrough, which is not ideal.
However, if each choice is meaningful and does something, then it feels good and you want to explore... Good Girl Gone Bad is a perfect example of what I mean. No punishments, just joy to explore different choices.

If your game isn't or cannot be designed like that, routes are more preferable, but you can still use points for other stuff - just differently, in a way that won't frustrate the player.

Well, apparently you would be surprised to see the number of games that use "==", precisely because the whole game rely on maxed points.

I am so paranoid to fuck something up in my code that I almost never use "==", even when I am sure points cannot go below or more than a value, I still put that possibility, just in case. For example, a cheater could put "9999" and break the game.

 

[IJustWantToAskQuestions]

Thanks to everyone who replied. Things are starting to come together in my head now.

 

[anne O'nymous]

I am not arguing that, as I've said previously, my point is that all choices should have an effect.

Well, they do have an effect, even when you don't rely on maxed points. If you decide to watch the football match instead of going to watch a movie with her, there's a direct effect. This even if it will not fully reflect on your relation with her because you're still on the 20% error margin.

Why should the effect be systematically immediate and fully visible?
When I pissed off my wife in the morning, there were a small direct effect, no kiss goodbye. But the real effect was only visible at night time, when I was sent to sleep on the couch. And when I really fucked it, the effect was still visible few days later, when my hope for some sexy time was hit by the "I'm still mad at you" hammer.
I agree that choices should all have an effect, but not on the fact that this effect should be immediate and couldn't just pill up. You can mess up the interaction because the choice that pleased you wasn't the one that raise the affection, and it will have consequences, but only if you continue to mess up too often.

Having a choice that does good, and all the rest that does nothing or is bad forces the player to use a walkthrough, which is not ideal.

Only if you rely on maxed points, or do not use points at all...

Because the two are equivalent. Pick the wrong choice, and you're fully out of the loop, either because you'll not have all the points, or just because it's the consequence of your choice.
There's really no difference between (using Ren'Py for convenience):

label whatever:
    menu:
        "Stay to watch the football match with some friends.":
            jump stayAtHome
        "Take your wife for a night out.":
            $ love +=1 
            jump restaurant

label stayAtHome:
    [watching the game]
    jump continueStory

label restaurant:
    [night out]
    jump continueStory

label continueStory:
    if love == 5: # '==' to enforce the fact that it's 'full points'
        [sexy time]
    else:
        [go sleep on the couch]

and:

label whatever:
    menu:
        "Stay to watch the football match with some friends.":
            [watching the game]
            [go sleep on the couch]
        "Take your wife for a night out.":
            [night out]
            [sexy time]

In both case you need the walkthrough to know that you have to take her out; well, here it's relatively obvious, but it's just an example.

This while a design based on a fraction of the maximum points would permit to still have the sexy time if the player didn't messed up too much.
Direct consequence, he don't have the night out, where he'll see her in a marvelous dress and make her drink enough for her to agree for anal if asked for. But if the player haven't been too much of a jerk, he will not be fully penalized for his choice. He'll miss the possibility to ask for anal, but will still have sex.

And it's the only design that actually offer to the player the possibility to pick the choice he want. He wanted to stay connected with his friends, he had it. But, contrarily to the two other design, this action by itself isn't enough to compromise his sexy night.

Of course, he'll miss a point that can possibly be impacting later if he mess up a bit too often. But this isn't irremediable. Keep track of the choice and, if he decided to bound with his friends, offer to the player the possibility to buy her some flowers, what will provide the missing point. It's how it works in real life, why shouldn't it also be a possibility in a game?
And in fact it give more depth to a game with a point system, because it offer to the player the possibility to acknowledge that he messed up and to fix it, if he want. Something that would be totally irrelevant without point system, since there's either full consequences or no consequences for your jerk move. Either you lost her forever, or she'll act as if nothing happened.
It's what make the choice more impactful, not necessarily in terms of game play or story, but in terms of narrative. Your choice had a consequence further than the sole deprivation of a sex scene, and you're put face to it: I messed up last nigh, should I apology?

However, if each choice is meaningful and does something, then it feels good and you want to explore... Good Girl Gone Bad is a perfect example of what I mean. No punishments, just joy to explore different choices.

How can a choice be "meaningful" if picking the wrong option have no real consequences outside of opening a route and closing the others? It's not a game, it's a lottery that need a walkthrough for you to see the scene you're actually interested in.

Not that this consequence have to be immediate or systematic, when points don't need to be maxed you can still avoid it, but the possibility need to exist. It's what make a game be a game.
"Fuck, why did I pick the pistol? I should have picked the assault rifle... Now I need to be cautious, because I can't face more than one or two enemy at once.", become then, "Well, I shouldn't have ignored her so often, now she stopped to propose anal... I'll need to be more affectionate for some time to gain back this possibility"
If your choice are not limited to "yes"/"no", or blind guess, it works fine without the need for a walkthrough. And it make your choice be actually meaningful, and not just the opening of an alternate route like in GGGB.

 

[Winterfire]

Well, they do have an effect, even when you don't rely on maxed points. If you decide to watch the football match instead of going to watch a movie with her, there's a direct effect. This even if it will not fully reflect on your relation with her because you're still on the 20% error margin.

Why should the effect be systematically immediate and fully visible?
When I pissed off my wife in the morning, there were a small direct effect, no kiss goodbye. But the real effect was only visible at night time, when I was sent to sleep on the couch. And when I really fucked it, the effect was still visible few days later, when my hope for some sexy time was hit by the "I'm still mad at you" hammer.
I agree that choices should all have an effect, but not on the fact that this effect should be immediate and couldn't just pill up. You can mess up the interaction because the choice that pleased you wasn't the one that raise the affection, and it will have consequences, but only if you continue to mess up too often.

This made me laugh more than it should

Anyway, I am not saying all of the choices should have an immediate effect, but the issue is that only very few and specific ones should have a lingering effect like that. And it's again due to player's frustration, imagine picking a choice 3 hours earlier and then said choice will prevent them to unlock a sex scene. That'd be an easy alt + f4 unless there's an alternative which is as good. So, a lingering choice prevents you from unlocking sex scene A, but instead you get Sex scene B which is make up sex a while later, both unique depending on the choice you picked.

I wasn't even talking about immediate effects, I think my english just sucks when it comes to explaining, but what I mean is that all choices should have an outcome whether it's immediate or not. Players just don't want traps where the right choice is just one.

In both case you need the walkthrough to know that you have to take her out; well, here it's relatively obvious, but it's just an example.

No, my game and a few others simply mark the choice differently. The fancy ones use icons, I just put a [Enter x Route] in the choice. This way if you're interested in the heroine, you won't risk missing it, even if the choices are pretty clear.

How can a choice be "meaningful" if picking the wrong option have no real consequences outside of opening a route and closing the others? It's not a game, it's a lottery that need a walkthrough for you to see the scene you're actually interested in.

That was just an example, I'd assume he won't put choices only for picking whose heroine you're interested in. Even that though, it's a meaningful choice as you can effectively decide if you want that heroine to be part of the story or not... However, there can of course be other meaningful choices just like GGGB does it.