: Re: Should I signal completion of a decision point in an interactive novel? In my visual novel (an interactive, narrative-based video-game), I have a detective character who decides whether he believes

@Speyer920

Vote Up Vote Down

For:

Many visual novels are in fact linear or have a few clearly signposted choices. Markers that indicate replayability encourage replayability and discovery of new content.
Some interactive stories invite the player to examine the interplay between choices and consequences, the different consequences forming an implicit moral message of the story (something we don't see in real life, where time flows in one direction). Perhaps you need the player to realize that yes, the predicament the protagonist is currently in is all due to that particular bad decision made earlier. Signals make it easier for the player to both revert to the necessary point and notice the connection.
Signals make it easier for the player to explore all content and all branches in the game, should they wish to do so.

Against:

It's easier to map the decision tree, after which the world may seem less "alive".
If your game has easy rollbacks, an immediate, easily interpreted failure signal would encourage the player to instantly retry, thus lessening the range of content seen by the individual player and the community.
Any metagame element that encourages replays reinforces the notion that all branches are equally good and the player "wins" by seeing all content and plotting the decision tree. If your game has an actual win state that the player needs to reach, this metagame reward detracts from the effort and joy of winning and the player's empathy for the protagonist.

A compromise solution to reward the player for exploring different paths and encouraging replayability is to signal when the player has found a plot branch he or she hasn't yet seen. You can do it right at the branching point or after the scene concludes. The game Cinders [free demo] by MoaCube does this.

(0)

Login to post a comment!