The Ludic vs. The Narrative

Here is part 2 of the literature review of my research. I should note that it is intended to be a synthesis of ideas, not my original thoughts. This is how I see games research fitting together to inform discussion and future research (including my own). Without further delay, part 2:

 

Immersive gaming experiences can lead to what is called flow, where a person feels “so intensely focused on their present activity that they lose reflective self-consciousness, feel in control of their environment, sense merging of their actions and awareness, experience temporal distortion, and are intrinsically rewarded by the activity they are engaged in.” (Lee and LaRose 2007). According to another study, players can also become disassociated when gaming, and enter a trance like state where they feel “outside of yourself” or “watching yourself”, or even feel like a different person altogether while playing a video game (Wood, et al. 2004). A player can also experience lapses in time while immersed in a virtual environment, leading to both positive and negative consequences (Richard, Griffiths and Parke 2007). While in an immersive gaming experience, ludic feedback is what keeps players in an immersive gaming experience. “The player is motivated to invest energy in the game because the game evaluates the player’s performance.” (Juul 2001). This constant feedback shapes the players experience by providing them with either rewards or sanctions, motivating the player to keep pursuing achievement.

Clint Hocking, in a blog post, discussed how the ludic and narrative elements of a game called Bioshock 2 were at odds with each other, and resulted in a dissonance that disrupts the player’s experience that he calls ludo-narrative dissonance (Hocking 2007). While Hocking argued that ludo-narrative dissonance was a negative thing, Michael Abbot argues that it is not all bad, and may even contribute to the gaming experience (Abbott 2008). Hartmann and Vorederer argue that moral disengagement is positive in gaming, because it frees the player to shoot characters and enjoy the virtual environment (Hartmann and Vorderer 2010)

Within the virtual environment are 3 types of objects that contribute to the process of immersion: bridging objects, false friend objects, and non-analogue objects. Bridging objects are objects in the virtual environment that behave exactly like their real world counterparts. False friend objects are objects in the virtual environment that superficially appear the same as their real world counterparts, but behave differently. Non-analogue objects are objects in the virtual environment that have no real world counterparts (Neville and Shelton 2010). Bridging and false friend objects allow players to bring their real world experience into the virtual environment, while non-analogue objects challenge the player’s understanding of the virtual environment (Roudavski and Penz 2005). Taylor notes two types of gaming experiences: diagetic, in which “the player is immersed in the act of playing the video game” and intradiagetic in which “the player is immersed in playing the game and in the experience of the game space as a spatial and narrated space” (Taylor 2002). In the diagetic experience, the ludic elements are the focus, while during the intradiagetic experience, the ludic elements provide a pathway to the narrative elements. Neville and Shelton talk about the Cybernetic Feedback Loop, in which players interact with the narrative through the ludic (Neville and Shelton 2010). This would suggest that ludic elements are more memorable than narrative, because of the possibility that a player may not be engaged at a level that is immersive enough to access the narrative elements. Even if a player reaches the narrative elements, they do so through the ludic elements.

 

So what does all of this mean? One implication is that we may not be getting to the story part of our games if we aren’t successful with the ludic elements. Lately I’ve been introducing video game to my wife and this concept is rearing its ugly head. She didn’t grow up with a controller in her hand like me, so she faces a steep learning curve every time she sits down (with me) to play a game. Simple things that we take for granted as gamers like the idea that in a platformer you can alter your momentum mid-jump are as foreign to her as the nuances of Victorian literature is to the common person. She’s not used to a dual analog stick setup, so any game with a camera is an uphill battle, usually resulting in frustration. I can see how the game mechanics are keeping her away from the narrative experience. But, she is a beginner. What effect the ludic elements have on a more experienced gamer is what is in question here. If the player can prove to be proficient with the game mechanics, does it disappear into the background or does it still make a meaningful impression? Do games fail at telling stories because of game mechanics, or do the game mechanics enhance the story telling ability of video games?

 

Advertisement