An example of good narrative in a video game: Silent Hill 2.

I take another break from programming and my everyday activities to discuss a bit of narrative in video games. First of all, here we need a good definition to speak with clearity.

A good video game narrative would be that where the game mechanics are directly related to the story. It is illogical, for example, for the story to herald pacifism and the risks of amibition if game mechanics rewards killing enemies with great perks. It would be a contradiction, where, however, some reknown examples have fallen.

But it doesn't stop there: after all, what a game offers is a match whose ending can change. In literature, there are examples of non-linear reading that can contribute to every reader getting their own interpretation of the story. The video game has introduced various possibilities to offer non-linear stories, although limitations have been the norm:

-The different ending may depend on particular story events, leading to bifurcations. This is made to make data saving easy and to simplify the involved algorithms. Thus, this system makes people to save the game just before the bifurcation to obtain so the different endings from that point.

-In other occasions, those endings are activated by finding objects, so it rewards occasional curiosity reather than a constant tactic, for example not killing anyone.

-Regardless of the method of activation, this kind of divergent stories are usually rated as "good ending and bad ending", to say, some of them are considered better for whatever the reasons: because the damsel in distress isn't dead, because the true boss of the bad guys has been defeated or, less frequently, because the main character is considered to have commited a moral transgression during the adventure. The truth is that these kind of menas are seldom alone, being one the predominant. Anyway, the very ending hierarchy doesn't make the so called bad endings an attractive option, as the developers themselves call them, because they are failures.

One of the reasons this system came to be questioned was Silent Hill 2. Since it first appeared for PlayStation 2 in September 2001, it updated its predecessor in both mechanics and ending interpretation. For the first part, it made use of a system similar to that of certain RPG based on Dungeons & Dragons: saving various scores, according to how the player acts at numerous events, instead of saving the result of only one.

Now, Silent Hill 2 took a giant step forward, because these events were apparently random actions. As a general norm, RPG save scores according to thow the player acts at a mission. Here, however, the attention was in things such as spending a lot of time with a female character, observing a useless knife or even keeping the main character health in good or bad state. Here is the FULL LIST of these elements.

About the interpretation of these endings, it is interesting to say that it can't be said that the best ending is good (not related to the better is the enemy of the good), because it is fair to say it is pretty depressing (without spoiling the plot, it is). The ending that depends on finding hidden objects is very sinister, as it supposes a pact with Lovecraftian forces in the best scenario. The other endings are even sadder that the first, and that's saying a lot.

In the same webpage I have linked, you can read about other Silent Hill games that were pretty innovative, specially the third. Whaterver the case, Silent Hill 2 endings are one of the many reasons to propose the game as one of the best games ever (I had written the former sentencce in such a way it said the game "was" good, but I have corrected it).

Forgotten gems.

I was giving my evening walk when, at coming near to an electronics shop, I saw the recent Super NES Classic Edition was sold there, more known as Super Nintendo Mini (due to, among other reasons, my farewell to video game consoles during the last breaths of PS2, it's been long since I trod on one). I stayed watching the display window for a while and I continued my walk, while thinking about the limitless success of the 16 bit generation, able to sell even nowadays.

As I got interested, I decided to check which games were included. The article on Wikipedia informed me that the Japanese version and the International bring different games. This made the fact that quite many games aren't known outside a country, in this case Japan, to stick in my mind. And that made me remember Moon: Remix RPG Adventure.

It's very likely that the reader, even if doted with a good knowledge of video games, doesn't know what game is, except if it's Japanese or has a good knowledge about games that didn't make it abroad. Moon: Remix RPG Adventure appeared in Japan in 1997 for the first PlayStation and ows its fame for being, to say it subtly, a hard parody of the Japanese concept or an RPG. Because, in the same way that in Spain some ignorants with a degree (sometimes called journalists) believes these games are part of Satanic rituals (1), in Japan the concept of an RPG is very ligated to one of the electronic adaptations of Dungeon & Dragons, Wizardry. In particular, to the gameplay Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy inaugurated in their time, as well as the rather melancholical plots that made the latter saga notorious.

Moon: Remix RPG Adventure, as it indicates the linked article, doesn't only parody this kind of gameplay directly, like the more recent Like a Clockwork, but it also show us that art essence is construct again the sand castle and adds a story original for what the standards of Japanese games then. With a quest structure already known in western RPGs and a strong pacifism, the game stands for treating NPCs like individuals instead of considerating them as generic. The articles explains better than me what makes the game notorious.

I've never played Moon: Remix RPG Adventure, but without a doubt it's an attractive idea that really deserves an opportunity. Indeed, I knew about this game in its time through a brief comment in certain magazine. Nevertheless, it never came out from Japan. Love-de-Lic, its creators, also count among their works other two creations, even more unknown: UFO: A Day in the Life and L.O.L: Lack of Love (2). Neither came out of Japan and, furthermore, the second appeared on the prematurately abandoned Dreamcast. Both of them look even stranger: the first consists of searching aliens and the second is a kind of sandbox whose only goal is living, making various actions such as cooperating with other creatures, eating them or even something as basical as urinating (note the formerly linked article speaks of other game with a button for the said excretory function). In 2000, however, the company dissolved.

Anyway, they're interesting games. The problem is that none of them has seen again the light of the day. Moon: Remix RPG Adventure has been privileged with no less than two translation teams who have tried to adapt this great work to English. But no word has been said about a remake for either a modern console or PC. In part, it's logical since all works by Love-de-Lic have fallen into a legal vacuum after its disappearance. In its own way, it worries me, because it implies forget a fragment of video game history. Of human expressions, video games are one of the most affeced by obsolescence (either intentionate or not): home consoles get surpassed and old PC games need patches to work in modern operative systems, too.

The mentioned Super Nintendo Mini, just like the slightly former NES Mini, works with an emulator of the original home console created in a Linux system. Something similar happens with Moon: Remix RPG Adventure, which needs an emulator of PSX to work. But there's a difference: these emulators are creations of fans and lack a brand, to put it simple. And, incredible as it may be for free spirits, lots of people ignore anything unbranded. And little is done to teach video game history.

In Berlin, a video game museum exists. One of its most notorious incentives is the fact that it allows to not only observe, but also to play in the original machines and to understand gaming twenty or thirty years ago. It's quite good, but the problem resides in that you can't always go to a museum. In the same way that we admit reeditions of literary classics, although their authors were never able to enjoy their profits, we should admit official reeditions of electronic products and readapt them to new devices.

Of course, it's impossible, due to the very legal vacuum that allows the existence of ROMs on Internet. Who's the actual owner of Moon: Remix RPG Adventure? And what happens with its artistic features, like storyboard, graphic design, music, dubbing...? And so, for a great portion of the audience, they reamain unknown, to be enjoyed only by collector and those interested on the little ROM world. Very sad.

1 Short summary for foreigners, who aren't likely to know about pre-Internet Spain: In Spain, there was a disgraced murder, in whick a bastard and an imbezile killed a poor gentleman who was waiting for the bus. Later, it joined with another murder, caused by a supposed addict to Final Fantasy VIII, and later thanks must given to media ability to throw rubbish where it isn't needed. This why RPGs still have among some slick-haired people of serious speeches, actually ignorants with just looks, an air of macabre entertainment, to use an expression that could go out from their lips, proper of murderers and sectary groups.

2 I have observed that the authors are obsessed in the structure Noun: Noun Syntagma for the titles of their games.

Those damn achievements!

Since ever, videogame fans have had the idea of better and worse outcomes when playing a game. Defeating the final boss without having been hurt not even once isn't the same as coming out totally screwed. The idea of a game with handicaps is also known: defeating the final boss without jumping or without using certain weapon, etcetera.

Some video games include a recognizement if that happens. As an example, in various fighting games it's possible to fight a secret boss only if the game end is reached without losing at all and with good results. The next video explains how to fight Shin Akuma in Street Fighter Alpha 2.

That's the first kind of achievement, the easiest to understand. Of course, some examples are especially difficult. For example, all those about finishing the game without dying once. The necessary training is made up for if the player is really interested in the game.

Next comes the one that could be called "curious": you do something that is somewhat unusual, because it's outside the normal course to progress in the game. Such it was in some Final Fantasy games, where monsters under the category undead died if the object to revive is used on them.

The third is a derivation of the Easter egg: a secret hidden somewhere in the game. It's easy to miss it because it's pretty well out of sight, but if you find it, it's an achievement for you. The very first Easter egg ever is perfect to illustrate this point (9:32).

And then there are... the stupid achievements, to be fair. Achievements that make no sense, to be honest, and almost impossible to get without a guide. Some are so nonsensical as, like a certain visual novel, to leave certain scene open during an hour and a half. Seriously? Who is so patient? It's clearly thought for the guides, it's also as uncomfortable as a pain in the ass.

The other modality of vain achievement, though not stupid, is ligated to get achievement just for advancing in the story. I find them logical if the gameplay has diverse routes to follow, but when it's linear, what sense does it make? It'd make sense to include one achievement for finishing the game, because it's obvious you need to surpass the first levels, am I right? I only found it sensible when the game has an open structure, without levels, which can give players an idea of how much they have advanced... It may not be welcome, though.

And, of course, it may happen that the player isn't interested in those achievements, specially if they're too strange. I don't know, but do I really want to go drinking with one of the developers IN REAL LIFE?

Of course, everyone can play as each likes. Ignoring achievements is a way as any other of playing. But it wouldn't be bad if some developers considered just for a moment their ideas before implementing them...