skip to main content
research-article

Formal Organization and Complex Responses to Video Games Narratives

Published:06 October 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The application of complex systems theories to the study of narratives proved able to offer a high heuristic value for the analysis of movies [24,26], TV series [35,36], music [45] and different other media with narrative capacity [cf. 20]. However, they were not yet thoroughly employed for the study of video game narratives. To address the relation between formal complexity and the complexity of response in video games, this paper conducts a contrastive analysis of two games of the Halo series, namely Halo 3 [6] and Halo 3 ODST [7]. Formal complexity is analyzed by applying Cutting's [13] approach for counting (narratorial) complexity. The evaluation of the responses to the narratives of these games is based on crowdsourced data, through Hven's [24] and Kiss and Willemsen's [26] understanding of audience response. The findings reveal that a complex response is at least partly predictable through an analysis of the formal quantitative and qualitative/organizational aspects of narratives, and, ultimately, that narrative complexity is a factor in the appreciation of games by the audience. The paper also poses the basis for the identification of a "Goldilocks level of complexity', which can maximize the appreciation of video games stories.

References

  1. Mieke Bal. 2019. Narrative Here-Now. In Narrative complexity: cognition, embodiment, evolution, Marina Grishakova and Maria Poulaki (eds.). University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Janarthanan Balakrishnan and Mark D. Griffiths. 2019. Perceived Addictiveness of Smartphone Games: A Content Analysis of Game Reviews by Players. Int J Ment Health Addiction 17, 4 (August 2019), 922--934. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-018--9897--5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Beltrami. 2021. Spatial Plots. Virtuality and the Embodied Mind in Baricco, Camilleri and Calvino. Legenda, Cambridge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jim Bizzocchi and Theresa Tanenbaum. 2011. Well Read: Applying Close Reading Techniques to Gameplay Experiences. . 262--290.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Jim Bizzocchi and Theresa Tanenbaum. 2012. Mass Effect 2: A Case Study in the Design of Game Narrative. Bulletin of Science Technology Society 32, (December 2012), 393--404. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467612463796Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Bungie. 2007. Halo 3. Microsoft Game Studios.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Bungie. 2009. Halo 3 ODST. Microsoft Game Studios.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Mariagabriella Cambiaghi. 2009. Le commedie in commedia: rappresentazioni teatrali nella finzione scenica. B. Mondadori.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Seymour Benjamin Chatman. 1978. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film (1st Edition ed.). Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. David Ciccoricco. 2010. Games of Interpretation and a Graphophiliac God of War. In Intermediality and Storytelling, Marina Grishakova and Marie-Laure Ryan (eds.). De Gruyter, Berlin, New York. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110237740.232Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Matthew Clark and James Phelan. 2020. Debating rhetorical narratology: on the synthetic, mimetic, and thematic aspects of narrative. The Ohio State University Press, Columbus.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Neil Cohn. 2019. Structural Complexity in Visual Narratives. Theory, Brains, and Cross- Cultural Diversity. In Narrative complexity: cognition, embodiment, evolution, Marina Grishakova and Maria Poulaki (eds.). University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. James E. Cutting. 2019. Simplicity, Complexity, and Narration in Popular Movies. In Narrative complexity: cognition, embodiment, evolution, Marina Grishakova and Maria Poulaki (eds.). University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Dante Alighieri. 1965. Divina Commedia. Fratelli Fabbri Editori, Milano.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Carlo Delcorno. 1983. Dante e l'«Exemplum» medievale. Lettere Italiane 35, 1 (1983), 3--28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari. 1977. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Viking Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Anders Drachen, Pejman Mirza-Babaei, and Lennart Nacke. 2018. Games User Research. OUP Oxford.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. María del Mar Grandío. 2021. The Power of Context: Transmedia Storytelling Model for Interactive Narrative Design and Complexity. Retrieved June 2, 2021 from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03229669Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Marina Grishakova. 2020. On Narrative Complexity and the Limits of Narrative Representation: A Reply to David Richter. Style 54, 4 (2020), 488--493. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5325/style.54.4.0488Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Marina Grishakova and Maria Poulaki (Eds.). 2019. Narrative complexity: cognition, embodiment, evolution. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. David Herman. 2011. Storyworld/Umwelt: Nonhuman Experiences in Graphic Narratives. SubStance 40, 1 (2011), 156--181. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1353/sub.2011.0000Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Hans Hoeken and Mario van Vliet. 2000. Suspense, curiosity, and surprise: How discourse structure influences the affective and cognitive processing of a story. Poetics 27, 4 (May 2000), 277--286. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304--422X(99)00021--2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Robin Hunicke, Marc Leblanc, and Robert Zubek. 2004. MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research. AAAI Workshop - Technical Report 1, (January 2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Steffen Hven. 2017. Cinema and Narrative Complexity: Embodying the Fabula. Amsterdam University Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1515/9789048530250Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Robert Jeffrey, Pengze Bian, Fan Ji, and Penny Sweetser. 2020. The Wisdom of the Gaming Crowd. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (CHI PLAY '20), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 272--276. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3383668.3419915Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Miklós Kiss and Steven Willemsen. 2017. Impossible puzzle films: a cognitive approach to contemporary complex cinema. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Noam Knoller. 2019. Complexity and the Userly Text. In Narrative complexity: cognition, embodiment, evolution, Marina Grishakova and Maria Poulaki (eds.). University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Noam Knoller. 2020. The Complexity Triad and two+ systemic models of IDS/N. Retrieved November 26, 2020 from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02530421Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Noam Knoller, Christian Roth, and Dennis Haak. forthcoming. Complexity Analysis Matrix. (forthcoming).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Hartmut Koenitz. 2015. Towards a Specific Theory of Interactive Digital Narrative. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315769189--8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Hartmut Koenitz, Mirjam Palosaari Eladhari, Sandy Louchart, and Frank Nack. 2020. INDCOR white paper 1: A shared vocabulary for IDN (Interactive Digital Narratives). arXiv:2010.10135 [cs] (November 2020). Retrieved November 20, 2020 from http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.10135Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Joseph P. Magliano, Karyn Higgs, and James Clinton. 2019. Sources of Complexity in Narrative Comprehension across Media. In Narrative complexity: cognition, embodiment, evolution, Marina Grishakova and Maria Poulaki (eds.). University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Ville Mäkelä and Albrecht Schmidt. 2020. I Don't Care as Long as It's Good: Player Preferences for Real-Time and Turn-Based Combat Systems in Computer RPGs. In Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (CHI PLAY '20), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 231--240. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3410404.3414248Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Marta Martín Núñez and Víctor Navarro Remesal. 2021. Narrative Complexity in Video Games: A Double Boomerang. L'Atalante. Revista de estudios cinematográficos; Issue 31 (2021). Retrieved from http://www.revistaatalante.com/index.php?journal=atalante&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=902&path%5B%5D=633Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Jason Mittell. 2006. Narrative Complexity in Contemporary American Television. (2006). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1353/vlt.2006.0032Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Jason Mittell. 2015. Complex TV: The Poetics of Contemporary Television Storytelling. NYU Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. T. H. Nelson. 1965. Complex information processing: a file structure for the complex, the changing and the indeterminate. In Proceedings of the 1965 20th national conference (ACM '65), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 84--100. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/800197.806036Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Gregoire Nicolis and Ilya Prigogine. 1989. Exploring Complexity: An Introduction. W H Freeman & Co, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. C O?oiu. 2014. Details of complexity. In Back to the future of gaming, Richard D. Duke and Willy Christian Kriz (eds.). wbv Media GmbH, Bielefeld, 40--49.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Leonid Perlovsky. 2016. Gödel vs. aristotle: Algorithmic complexity, models of the Mind, and top representations. 1787--1794. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.2016.7727416Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Federico Pianzola. 2018. Looking at Narrative as a Complex System:The Proteus Principle. In Narrating Complexity, Richard Walsh and Susan Stepney (eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--319--64714--2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. John Pier. 2017. Complexity: A Paradigm for Narrative? In Emerging Vectors of Narratology, Per Krogh Hansen, John Pier, Philippe Roussin and Wolf Schmid (eds.). Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Kirk Polking, Joan Bloss, Colleen Cannon, and Debbie Cinnamon. 1990. Writing, A to Z?: the terms, procedures, and facts of the writing business defined, explained, and put within reach. Cincinnati, Ohio?: Writer's Digest Books. Retrieved June 1, 2021 from http://archive.org/details/writingtoztermsp00polkGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Brian Richardson. 2019. A Poetics of Plot for the Twenty-First Century: Theorizing Unruly Narratives. The Ohio State University Press. Retrieved December 4, 2020 from https://kb.osu.edu/handle/1811/88537Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Martin E. Rosenberg. 2019. Jazz as Narrative. Narrating Cognitive Processes Involved in Jazz Improvisation. In Narrative complexity: cognition, embodiment, evolution, Marina Grishakova and Maria Poulaki (eds.). University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Marie-Laure Ryan. 2019. Narrative as/and Complex System/s. In Narrative complexity: cognition, embodiment, evolution, Marina Grishakova and Maria Poulaki (eds.). University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Michael Sellers. 2017. Advanced Game Design: A Systems Approach (1° edizione ed.). Addison-Wesley Professional.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Meir Sternberg. 2003. Universals of Narrative and Their Cognitivist Fortunes (I). Poetics Today 24, 2 (2003), 297--395.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Meir Sternberg. 2003. Universals of Narrative and Their Cognitivist Fortunes (II). Poetics Today 24, 3 (2003), 517--638.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Björn Strååt and Harko Verhagen. Using User Created Game Reviews for Sentiment Analysis: A Method for Researching User Attitudes. 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Mattia Thibault. 2016. Lotman and play: For a theory of playfulness based on semiotics of culture. SSS 44, 3 (December 2016), 295--325. DOI:https://doi.org/10.12697/SSS.2016.44.3.01Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. David Thue. 2020. What Might an Action do? Toward a Grounded View of Actions in Interactive Storytelling. In Interactive Storytelling, Anne-Gwenn Bosser, David E. Millard and Charlie Hargood (eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 212--220. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3-030--62516-0_19Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Haridimos Tsoukas and Mary Hatch. 2001. Complex Thinking, Complex Practice: The Case for a Narrative Approach to Organizational Complexity. Human Relations - HUM RELAT 54, (August 2001). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726701548001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Richard Walsh. 2018. Sense and Wonder: Complexity and the Limits of Narrative Understanding. In Narrating Complexity, Richard Walsh and Susan Stepney (eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--319--64714--2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Richard Walsh and Susan Stepney (Eds.). 2018. Narrating Complexity. Springer International Publishing, Cham. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--319--64714--2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Xiaohui Wang and Dion Hoe-Lian Goh. 2020. Components of game experience: An automatic text analysis of online reviews. Entertainment Computing 33, (March 2020), 100338. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2019.100338Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. Marcin Wardaszko. 2018. Interdisciplinary Approach to Complexity in Simulation Game Design and Implementation. Simulation & Gaming 49, 3 (June 2018), 263--278. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878118777809Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Steven Willemsen. 2021. Temporal Puzzles and Epistemic Emotions: An Empirical Pilot. In International Society for the Study of Narrative (ISSN) Conference 2021. Online.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Steven Willemsen and Miklós Kiss. 2020. Keeping Track of Time: The Role of Spatial and Embodied Cognition in the Comprehension of Nonlinear Storyworlds. Style 54, 2 (2020), 172--198. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5325/style.54.2.0172Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. How long is Halo 3? | HowLongToBeat. Retrieved February 16, 2021 from https://howlongtobeat.com/game?id=4263Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. How long is Halo 3: ODST? | HowLongToBeat. Retrieved February 16, 2021 from https://howlongtobeat.com/game?id=4264Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Halo 3. Metacritic. Retrieved February 16, 2021 from https://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/halo-3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Halo 3: ODST. Metacritic. Retrieved February 16, 2021 from https://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/halo-3-odstGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Amazon.com: Halo 3: ODST - Xbox 360: Microsoft Corporation: Video Games. Retrieved June 1, 2021 from https://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Halo-ODST-Xbox-360/dp/B001HWB68K/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Halo 3: ODST on Steam. Retrieved February 16, 2021 from https://store.steampowered.com/app/1064272/Halo_3_ODST/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Amazon.com: Halo 3 - Xbox 360: Artist Not Provided: Video Games. Retrieved May 24, 2021 from https://www.amazon.com/Halo-3-Xbox-360/dp/B000FRU0NUGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Halo 3 on Steam. Retrieved May 24, 2021 from https://store.steampowered.com/app/1064271/Halo_3/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Formal Organization and Complex Responses to Video Games Narratives

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
            Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 5, Issue CHI PLAY
            CHI PLAY
            September 2021
            1535 pages
            EISSN:2573-0142
            DOI:10.1145/3490463
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Copyright © 2021 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 6 October 2021
            Published in pacmhci Volume 5, Issue CHI PLAY

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader