-
Do not use Discord to host any images you post, these links expire quickly! You can learn how to add images to your posts here.
tips for building a story
- Thread starter Lunavis
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2017
- Posts
- 122
Well, this is just a small one, but I think it will be useful. Try to give each character a personality. This can be done through having their history shown during the game, having their own theme or putting them in a position that reflects who they are.
Also with plot development, the way I like to do it is to make a huge mind map and take some key points about what you want your game to be about. Then select the best ones to go off and expand on them some more.
Also with plot development, the way I like to do it is to make a huge mind map and take some key points about what you want your game to be about. Then select the best ones to go off and expand on them some more.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
- Posts
- 204
Also, if you can give characters certain speaking patterns - though not necessarily catchphrases - it can go a long way towards making them sound like their own person. For example, I like to use unnecessary computer science metaphors all over the place
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2017
- Posts
- 147
Give your evil team/antagonist a realistic goal. Don't just have them be evil just to be evil. The most important question to ask in that situation is the 'why'. Why are they doing what they doing. To some degree, any objective - even extreme ones such as freezing an entire region - could be reasonable, so long as there's a damn good 'why' to justify it. For example, 'freezing an entire region just because they're evil' wouldn't flow as well as 'freezing an entire region to stop a deadly virus from spreading across the world and wiping out all life.' (That one might be a bit darker and edgy, but it's just an example.)
Personally, when I work out an antagonist, I usually take two things in to account. One of my favorite quotes: "sometimes to do a little good you have to be the bad guy" and what I call the "relatability factor". I find that the more solidly written antagonists are the ones that take questionable actions but in the end they're just trying to do something good (or more rather, they have reasonable points of view that make them believe it's the right thing to do.) The relatability factor simply means that the player can identify with and, if placed in the right circumstances, could see themselves doing the exact same thing that the antagonist is doing. Referring to the previous example, I doubt that many people that, if given the choice to freeze a whole region, would actually do it. However, if freezing the region would save all life on the planet, then they'd certainly have a much better reason to do something so drastic.
I could probably go on all day, but I'll spare you the boredom. The main point is that antagonists are usually a huge part of the story, so they need to be written pretty well.
Personally, when I work out an antagonist, I usually take two things in to account. One of my favorite quotes: "sometimes to do a little good you have to be the bad guy" and what I call the "relatability factor". I find that the more solidly written antagonists are the ones that take questionable actions but in the end they're just trying to do something good (or more rather, they have reasonable points of view that make them believe it's the right thing to do.) The relatability factor simply means that the player can identify with and, if placed in the right circumstances, could see themselves doing the exact same thing that the antagonist is doing. Referring to the previous example, I doubt that many people that, if given the choice to freeze a whole region, would actually do it. However, if freezing the region would save all life on the planet, then they'd certainly have a much better reason to do something so drastic.
I could probably go on all day, but I'll spare you the boredom. The main point is that antagonists are usually a huge part of the story, so they need to be written pretty well.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
- Posts
- 93
Personally, I'd say to shake up the normal Pokémon plot and turn it on it's head. Instead of focusing on a generic evil team, 8 Gyms and a legendary Pokémon, try something different. How about a tournament for Trainers? Maybe focusing on a human who fused with a Pokémon? Or an explorer who landed on an island full of unknown Pokémon.
Also, make your characters fresh and believable. You can do this by giving them quirks and dorky aspects. Build up their personality and development by putting them in all kinds of scenarios.
But most of all, try and jot down a plot in good detail. Nothing's worse in a story than if you break continuity. I'd also recommend sharing the plot with others to see how they think; this way you can flesh out your ideas to their best potential.
Also, make your characters fresh and believable. You can do this by giving them quirks and dorky aspects. Build up their personality and development by putting them in all kinds of scenarios.
But most of all, try and jot down a plot in good detail. Nothing's worse in a story than if you break continuity. I'd also recommend sharing the plot with others to see how they think; this way you can flesh out your ideas to their best potential.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2017
- Posts
- 561
I think the most important aspect is to design your story to be played. It's being put into a game, which means it'll be interactive. Fanfictions go elsewhere.
The player should have some agency, some effect on the events in the game. Being able to influence what goes on is far more preferable to watching a bunch of cutscenes. If you encounter the evil team somewhere and fight all its members, this ought to mean that you have thwarted their current efforts and caused them to fail (at least for now). Having the antagonists change their plans due to your interference is a good thing, even if it's ultimately all scripted, because it gives the player the impression that they actually achieved something. I would not appreciate getting to the end of a pack of evil team grunts, only to find I'm "too late" and the evil plan has been set into motion anyway. That's cheap.
The player should have some agency, some effect on the events in the game. Being able to influence what goes on is far more preferable to watching a bunch of cutscenes. If you encounter the evil team somewhere and fight all its members, this ought to mean that you have thwarted their current efforts and caused them to fail (at least for now). Having the antagonists change their plans due to your interference is a good thing, even if it's ultimately all scripted, because it gives the player the impression that they actually achieved something. I would not appreciate getting to the end of a pack of evil team grunts, only to find I'm "too late" and the evil plan has been set into motion anyway. That's cheap.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
- Posts
- 2,220
(spoilers for Uranium, Reborn, and canon games)
(had a bit on rivals before the weekly discussion came whoops)
Esserise on the Bulbagarden forums had a really neat insight to SM's storyline.
I think this is a good thing to keep in mind with story writing-as fun as wild, disaster-preventing stories are (and they are good to use!), a smaller story that's more about the way people interact underlying it is a good way to set your story apart and make it less predictable. (it also makes the audience more emotionally invested in characters, which can make the dramatic scenes have a stronger effect)
The plot in Gen 5 has a similar depth. At the climax, you know you're going to defeat N to become champion, and you know you're going to catch your dragon, just like all box legendaries before it. But seeing how N changes in his worldview-especially with his father-is a more unpredictable story.
I think it's worth mentioning that the legendary Pokemon involved in both of these weren't "all-powerful gods", either. They had legends and great power, but they weren't the creators or rulers of the universe's properties-they were just unique. That's not to say that a Pokemon that does use that is a bad design-I could go on and on about what I love with the legendaries we have-but if a legendary in a plot isn't clear-cut like that, it kinda forces you to be a little more creative in incorporating it into the story, rather than just being "get this Pokemon and the world is altered exactly as you want it".
Uranium also does this quite well. It has a lot of action-themed plots-the chief ranger, a nuclear terrorist, the rising Pokemon champion, and a secret international officer-but it's ultimately a story about two close families that are hurting. (and it manages the balance between the two quite well!)
Gens 3, 4, and 6 did not do this very well, IMO. They were still quite fun to adventure through, but the main conflict was essentially "this crime boss is discontent with the world, and wants to use a legendary to alter it"-so even amongst the excitement of the Distortion world, Team Flare's base, and that sick underwater cave, there wasn't much to anticipate from the story. Of course I'm going to capture the legendary and stop this crisis-that's just how this works.
I get the feeling that this sounds like I'm ragging on the storylines of most of the games, and that's not at all my intent-even when I knew the end results of their plot, the world and characters it involved were still engaging and delightful. The core part of a story isn't the only important part, after all. But I think if you want to make your story unique, it's a good idea to include a smaller-scale story-not necessarily in favor of a larger one, just in addition to.
I think this is a good thing to keep in mind with story writing-as fun as wild, disaster-preventing stories are (and they are good to use!), a smaller story that's more about the way people interact underlying it is a good way to set your story apart and make it less predictable. (it also makes the audience more emotionally invested in characters, which can make the dramatic scenes have a stronger effect)
The plot in Gen 5 has a similar depth. At the climax, you know you're going to defeat N to become champion, and you know you're going to catch your dragon, just like all box legendaries before it. But seeing how N changes in his worldview-especially with his father-is a more unpredictable story.
I think it's worth mentioning that the legendary Pokemon involved in both of these weren't "all-powerful gods", either. They had legends and great power, but they weren't the creators or rulers of the universe's properties-they were just unique. That's not to say that a Pokemon that does use that is a bad design-I could go on and on about what I love with the legendaries we have-but if a legendary in a plot isn't clear-cut like that, it kinda forces you to be a little more creative in incorporating it into the story, rather than just being "get this Pokemon and the world is altered exactly as you want it".
Uranium also does this quite well. It has a lot of action-themed plots-the chief ranger, a nuclear terrorist, the rising Pokemon champion, and a secret international officer-but it's ultimately a story about two close families that are hurting. (and it manages the balance between the two quite well!)
Gens 3, 4, and 6 did not do this very well, IMO. They were still quite fun to adventure through, but the main conflict was essentially "this crime boss is discontent with the world, and wants to use a legendary to alter it"-so even amongst the excitement of the Distortion world, Team Flare's base, and that sick underwater cave, there wasn't much to anticipate from the story. Of course I'm going to capture the legendary and stop this crisis-that's just how this works.
I get the feeling that this sounds like I'm ragging on the storylines of most of the games, and that's not at all my intent-even when I knew the end results of their plot, the world and characters it involved were still engaging and delightful. The core part of a story isn't the only important part, after all. But I think if you want to make your story unique, it's a good idea to include a smaller-scale story-not necessarily in favor of a larger one, just in addition to.
I'm personally of the opinion that if your game has multiple antagonists, they should have some distinct personalities. That doesn't mean that every grunt has to have an elaborate backstory, but I should at least be able to tell your admins apart besides just their colors. (Looking at you, Team Flare) Pokemon Reborn pulls this off phenomenally-Meteor's admins are all distinct in personality, history, and goals, and even grunts recognize the player-not just Aster and Eclipse, but grunts on the last scheme that'll recognize you in the next.
Personally, from a story standpoint, I find I prefer single villains to a whole team, unless they're one of those "works in the shadows, controlling things you wouldn't even expect" teams like Rocket or Meteor or a team with a goal/perk I could actually see someone wanting to join, like Tean Plasma, Team Skull, and Team Aurem of Pokemon Sage. (I guess the Aether Foundation kinda fits here, too? The employees supported the group for its good, and it was their loyalty to it that made them want to fight the player, but they didn't have Lusamine's goals-but then, not everyone on Team Plasma had Ghetsis' goals) Villains don't always have a massive crime ring sort of scheme-sometimes their goals are selfish (wanting all power to themselves, wanting a personal desire like Lusamine, or wanting to shape the world in their image), and sometimes they're destructive (like CURIE or Lysandre). It takes a little suspension of disbelief to think that there's a lot of people in that region that are just itching to help out someone like that. (Sorry, Team Magma-I love you, but I just can't think that there are really that many people in Hoenn that look at the planet and say "You know what? IGN is right. There is too much water. I wonder if there's anybody out there wanting to get rid of it?")
But story doesn't have complete control over a game. Even though I would like to not have to pass through Background Grunts A-Z to get to a plot, there's no denying that battling through grunts is a lot more fun and feels a lot more like taking on a foe than say, going through a million warp tiles. (They're fun, but they can't be the main way the player tries to stop the villain)
Personally, from a story standpoint, I find I prefer single villains to a whole team, unless they're one of those "works in the shadows, controlling things you wouldn't even expect" teams like Rocket or Meteor or a team with a goal/perk I could actually see someone wanting to join, like Tean Plasma, Team Skull, and Team Aurem of Pokemon Sage. (I guess the Aether Foundation kinda fits here, too? The employees supported the group for its good, and it was their loyalty to it that made them want to fight the player, but they didn't have Lusamine's goals-but then, not everyone on Team Plasma had Ghetsis' goals) Villains don't always have a massive crime ring sort of scheme-sometimes their goals are selfish (wanting all power to themselves, wanting a personal desire like Lusamine, or wanting to shape the world in their image), and sometimes they're destructive (like CURIE or Lysandre). It takes a little suspension of disbelief to think that there's a lot of people in that region that are just itching to help out someone like that. (Sorry, Team Magma-I love you, but I just can't think that there are really that many people in Hoenn that look at the planet and say "You know what? IGN is right. There is too much water. I wonder if there's anybody out there wanting to get rid of it?")
But story doesn't have complete control over a game. Even though I would like to not have to pass through Background Grunts A-Z to get to a plot, there's no denying that battling through grunts is a lot more fun and feels a lot more like taking on a foe than say, going through a million warp tiles. (They're fun, but they can't be the main way the player tries to stop the villain)
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2017
- Posts
- 119
My 2 cents on character development and plot building:
For character development, think of them as real people with goals desires and flaws, and even quirks. Develop them in your head or on paper with likes and dislikes and thoughts and opinions, make them real. Then when you drop them in your world, they have personality and character. But if they have certain opinions ideals or flaws, you can hone in on those aspects and have them come to a realization or self awareness as they progress through the story. Maybe have them see the error in their beliefs and learn something and grow as a person from that experience - or have them go through a stressful situation, and with the help of the player, they learn they don't have to go through everything alone.
For plot building, you have to have specific ideas of what you want to happen. It's not enough to have cool ideas for plot things, you need to have an end goal. determine how you want to the game to start and end, and then develop how you want it to go from A to B
you need to understand where the game is going before you start drawing yourself into corners and end up tieing things together that have no real connection.
Is the game going to focus on an evil team leader with a specific ideal, who by the end realizes his dream, and is eventually thwarted by you? If the game focused on becoming the strongest trainer, and conflict arises from that? how will you move the plot forward, what milestones are going to be reached and how do they fit the plot?
That's a lot of work, and an easy way to think about it is to think what do you want to have happen, whats the point of playing your game. What kind of villain do you want? What kind of pokemon will he use or try to obtain? How can you incorporate his goals into the world you're building? Why does his goals matter in the world you are making? How can his actions have real implications and consequences?
If you ground everything you do in a reality you establish and connect it all from the start, everything will flow correctly.
For character development, think of them as real people with goals desires and flaws, and even quirks. Develop them in your head or on paper with likes and dislikes and thoughts and opinions, make them real. Then when you drop them in your world, they have personality and character. But if they have certain opinions ideals or flaws, you can hone in on those aspects and have them come to a realization or self awareness as they progress through the story. Maybe have them see the error in their beliefs and learn something and grow as a person from that experience - or have them go through a stressful situation, and with the help of the player, they learn they don't have to go through everything alone.
For plot building, you have to have specific ideas of what you want to happen. It's not enough to have cool ideas for plot things, you need to have an end goal. determine how you want to the game to start and end, and then develop how you want it to go from A to B
you need to understand where the game is going before you start drawing yourself into corners and end up tieing things together that have no real connection.
Is the game going to focus on an evil team leader with a specific ideal, who by the end realizes his dream, and is eventually thwarted by you? If the game focused on becoming the strongest trainer, and conflict arises from that? how will you move the plot forward, what milestones are going to be reached and how do they fit the plot?
That's a lot of work, and an easy way to think about it is to think what do you want to have happen, whats the point of playing your game. What kind of villain do you want? What kind of pokemon will he use or try to obtain? How can you incorporate his goals into the world you're building? Why does his goals matter in the world you are making? How can his actions have real implications and consequences?
If you ground everything you do in a reality you establish and connect it all from the start, everything will flow correctly.