Through use of the problem solving model presented in Kristine
Jorgensen’s paper on the link between problem solving within video games and
the inherent effect on player agency which arises from those choices (2003), a
methodological framework which allows for the analysis of agency within a given
scenario of a game can be created. Using this framework to analysis a single
scenario within Episode One of The Walking Dead Game (Telltale, 2012) will allow
both the effectiveness of the agency within the scene and the overall
usefulness of the methodology to be assessed.
Within video games, agency is generally considered as any type of action
taken by the player which results in direct change on a situation within the
game which continues the narrative (Murray, 1997), or simply as the “power to
progress the course of action in a game” (Jorgensen, 2003). As playing a
computer game can be considered a series of problems which the player must
solve, most action taken by the player would be considered an agency action.
Espen Aaresth labeled these problems as “aporia”, a roadblock in the game which
requires the player to solve a specific problem to continue, while the solution
to the problem is termed an “epiphany”; as it represents a sudden realization
by the player allowing them to solve the aporia. Aaresth also states that when
confronted with an aporia, players will usually develop a hypothesis as to what
the epiphany could be from previous, similar aporia which they have already
encountered and solved.
Jorgensen’s model of problem solving combines the concept of aporia and
epiphany along with the concept of agency to create a general model for problem
solving. This model is divided into three phases which progress to ether an
epiphany which solves the problem, or failure. The first phase Jorgensen terms “comprehend
the aporia”; this is when the player encounters an aporia and must seek to
understand the problem. This is a mental step where the player prepares for
action. The second phase is when the player must develop a strategy to reach the
epiphany, which Jorgensen theorizes players will form subconsciously through
the manifestation of past experiences in similar aporia they have already
encountered. The third phase is when the player takes intentional action. This
is the stage where the player applies the strategy from the second phase and
attempts to solve the aporia. Finally, the strategy will ether solves the
aporia through an epiphany and progression of the game or will lead to failure
which will normally result in the player returning to phase one.
Throughout The Walking dead, players are presented with an interactive
narrative in which they can control the actions of Lee Everett. The narrative
is often presented to the player through different choices the player can make
to solve a problem or simply respond to an in-game characters question. Within
Episode One of the Walking Dead, the player is tasked with the rescue of
another character that is trapped in a motel room. Once the player reaches the
character, the game reveals the character to be a young girl. The girl informs
you that she has been bitten and will soon become a zombie, then asks the
player to “lend” her their gun. The game then gives you a very limited time to
choose what to do. As this scenario visually presents players with different
options and the narrative as a whole is based around player choice to solve
specific problems, analysis through Jorgensen’s model is highly appropriate.
In the first phase of the problem solving model, the player must
correctly understand the aporia presented; that the girl they have just rescued
will shortly die and she is asking for your gun in order to kill herself. Once
realized, the player enters the second phase and must chose a strategy they
hope will lead to epiphany. Instead of subconsciously creating a plan however,
The Walking Dead presents the player with three options; ether give the girl
the gun, refuse to give her the gun or do nothing and allow the other
characters to resolve the situation without input from the player. The player
will then enter the third phase by choosing one of the options. Any of the
three options will progress the game, however all three will lead to a
different continuation.
While this scenario can be analyzed with the Jorgensen model, the game
gives the player choices on screen to select as their response. This means that
instead of subconsciously choosing their plan, players can consciously judge
which plan is most likely to deliver the best continuation of the game instead.
Additionally, as players are given set choices, most players would assume that any
option they select would be correct and so the second phase does not operate as
intended by Jorgensen. Finally, while player action is required to continue the
game, the option to do nothing will result in the game progressing without your
input. This is a valid solution which must be done consciously by the player
but may not fall under the tradition definition of an agency action.
Through analysis of a scenario within The Walking Dead using the
Jorgensen model, we can conclude that while not ideal, the model shows that the
player must execute an agency action in order to reach an epiphany which
resolves the aporia presented. This example also allows problems in both the scenario
and model to be seen. In order to improve the scenario in The Walking Dead,
developing an alternative method of choice which would allow the player to
organically choose a response to the aporia while still maintaining the sense
of urgency and branching narrative options, would allow for a greater sense of
agency as the player would be free to try their own subconsciously realized
solutions. This example also suggests that the Jorgensen model can be further
developed to allow for less traditional games situations such as branching game
narratives in which there are several different “correct” outcomes which lead
to progression of the game.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aarseth, Espen (1999). Aporia
and Epiphany in Doom
and The Speaking Clock. The Temporality
of Ergodic Art, in Cyberspace
Textuality. Computer Technology and Literary
Theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Davidson, D. (1980). Essays on
Actions and Events. Clarendon Press: Oxford.
Jorgensen, K. (2003). Problem
Solving: The Essence of Player Action in Computer Games. [Online] Available
http://www.digra.org/dl/db/05150.49599.pdf [November 16th 2012]
Jørgensen, Kristine (2003). Aporia
& Epiphany in Context: Computer Game Agency in Baldur’s Gate II & Heroes
of Might & Magic IV. [Online] Available http://www.ub.uib.no/elpub/2003/h/705002/Hovedoppgave.pdf [November 16th 2012]
Murray, Janet (1997). Hamlet on
the Holodeck. The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. New York:
The Free Press
Telltale Games (2012). The Walking
Dead: Episode 1. California: Telltale Games.
No comments:
Post a Comment