Analyst group says developers and players are naturally divided on the value of narrative and cut-scenes
Consumers are less interested in game narrative and cut-scenes than developers themselves.
This account of a natural division between players and creators comes from business consultant group Absolute Quality, who have for the past few months been commissioning bio-sensory feedback tests on both developers and target consumers.
At the recent Game Developers Conference in San Francisco this year, Absolute Quality asked various game developers to play a “popular first-person shooter” on the Xbox 360 while fitted up with a wireless headset device that measures brain waves, heart rate and sweat responses.
Outside of GDC, a number of core consumers were set up with the same equipment and asked to play the same game.
Results of these tests suggest that developers have a higher level of engagement during moments like cut-scenes, narrative discourse and “highly-scripted” set-pieces. Gamers were, however, were more enthused when play was simple and direct, showing more levels of engagement when “running and gunning” through the game.
Advertisement
The comprehensive study saw a number of different companies involved. Absolute Quality commissioned the tests and used brainwave technology from research group EmSense. The data from the study, however, was interpreted by market research and consulting firm Techaisle.
Techaisle’s interpretation of the data is that the ‘production elements’ of games – from FMVs to cut-scenes to narrative exposition – “tend to reflect the preferences of the developers themselves and not the preferences of the target consumer.” And since those production elements tend to make up a sizable chunk of a project’s funding, the research calls into question the value, and indeed necessity, of using them.
However the research does not account for the effect elements like cut-scenes have on sales, specifically how high production values are effective in game previews, reviews and PR campaigns.
The study’s methodology shows that the target consumer group was comprised of gamers who owned or had access to an Xbox 360 and were qualified as people who play FPSes on a regular basis. However, it is unclear whether the developers involved in the experiments were just as familiar with first-person shooters.
Missing from the study is the effect many years of play experience – certainly an asset of the game developer – has on play responses.
Also absent was the key issue of the developer’s occupational habit of analyzing individual elements of a game; something which perhaps happens more frequently when a developer is watching rather than playing.
Interesting stuff here, but ultimately the study is a bit narow-minded.
It might be right that developer's have more fun in different places than the average gamer, but this study is trying to say that this means developers should rethink cut-scenes and the story.
That's a prety mad swing from "devs like it more" to "you shouldn't be making them"
Crazy, even.
Interesting article though
Well... I seem to remember something about "lies, damn lies and statistics"...
The results are interesting, but (as the article states) many key factors were ignored and the groups studied seem very small.
I suppose we can deduce that "some people think that FPS games don't need as much of a storyline as we designers like to put in" and nod our heads sagely.
"One group of people not same as other group of people."
Thanks, Absolute Quality!
Sure if you want your game to be completely run-of-the-mill, sell a fairly OK on it's launch week and then be forgotten forever, by all means! Stick to the stats and bio-readings.
I'm a big fan of FPSes but if you're used to engaging in non-stop twitch-fests, there's only SO much that'll get your heart-rate way up there and narrative definitely comes in last place on that list.
With tests like these it feels like we're being forced to believe we're manufacturing some sort of drug instead of memorable gaming experiences.
Yeah Carlos, agreed
Looking at a player's biological and physiological responses can really help developers understand what is exciting and what isn't - pretty sure Valve used it for Left 4 Dead - but it's not qualitative data.
It can't suggest that developers work on things that interest them more than players, it can only say developers are more engaged at certain points, wich could mean a load of different things.
Only some ametuer interpretor would have the stupidity to turn graphs into a statement about the very nature of game development.
Madness, yo.
I'm a developer and I love Story but I dont like protracted cut scenes, unless they are absolutely brilliant. But if its brilliant I enjoy it from a technical and aesthetic standpoint as well as from a narrative perspective. I suspect that that will account for a jump in "appreciation". Consumers tend to take this stuff for granted, one gorgeous thing is just as gorgeous as another whereas a developer will look at it and as well as being enthralled by the plot twists will also be thinking "oh thats clever", "I like how they've approached that", or even feel smug when they see something that isn't as good as something they're working on...
I also wonder about the choice of FPS genre as a benchmark for anyones appreciation of narrative.
surely something like Uncharted or GTA IV would have been better, something with a decent story and well acted characters.
Techaisle seem to have misconflated story with sections where the player has no control. I thought that the general consensus was that good games design relies on the player doing things as opposed to being shown them. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to draw very much from the study when certain key information seems to be missing.
Experience has taught me that women/girls respond better to stories and narrative than men/boys do. The male urge to just get on with it "Get out of my way!!" HONK HONK etc. is much stronger in general than in female, who seem more prepared to wait their turn. Also females have a stronger response to characterization for characterizaion sake than men do.
Men respond to stories mostly to find out what the goal is and to enjoy any cool bits of animation. Females in general are more receptive to the bits that are actually setting the scene and giving background information that grows the characters and the feeling of the place and the story in which they are taking part.
So in short cutscenes are mostly for women, young children who like to watch as much as to play, tech heads, who marvel at the poly count and games buyers and sellers who cant play the game in any case.
So they are not entirely useless... just a pain in the ass that they are about 20 times easier to use to sell a game than good long term gameplay.. which you can only sell if the consumers already trust the developers before they have even bought the product.
Having downloaded this for a more in depth look, the "raw" data from the study actually seems to be pretty interesting and worth a serious look. The Techaisle report on the other hand is, frankly, amateurish!
