Forum Posts Following Followers
70 15 9

How to Tell a Compelling Story (Update #3)

I recently wrote a scathing review of Dragon Age: Origins in which I criticized the evident lack of effort that went into writing the story. Naturally, I received some flak for this. Apparently most people wouldn't know good writing if it bit them on the ass.

As a teacher of English and a part-time writer, I feel compelled to point out some of the hallmarks of good - and bad - writing, as well as outline some basic rules for making your writing interesting. I'll be sure to make lots of pop culture references along the way to keep you entertained.

Rule #1 - Stop picking over Tolkien's desecrated remains. Elves, dwarves, magic, creatures of pure evil, long-lost heirs to the throne, dragons...it's all been done before, and it was done better. Hell, even Tolkien ripped off most of his subject matter from old English and Norse legends.

Rule #2 - The antagonist must be believable. I recently watched the movie 'Serenity'. Please understand, I have never watched the television series on which it is based (id est I am not a fan) so my observations here are completely objective. The antagonist in that movie is scary as hell, not because he is evil, but because he is the exact opposite. He believes with every fiber of his being that what he is doing is for the greater good of mankind. He believes it so devoutly that he is prepared to sacrifice EVERYTHING to carry out his mission. That kind of conviction is far more frightening than simply being 'evil'. Antagonists that appear to live by the motto, "what would Adolf do?" are not convincing, and therefore do not come across as a serious threat.

Rule #2(b) - It's worth noting that in the movie 'Serenity', while the antagonist is believable, the body he represents is not. At that point, the writers fell back on the 'evil empire' cliche. The Alliance (or whatever the hell they called it in that movie) set events in motion by perpetrating an act of absurdly evil proportions which is not revealed until very near the end. Without givingtoo muchaway, I would say that their goal is believable, but the fact that they tested their product the way they didrather than in a lab is not.

Rule #3 - If you see a cliche coming, turn it on its head. For instance, who is the greatest superhero of all time? 90% of you will have said 'Batman'. This is, of course, the correct answer. But why is it the correct answer? What makes Batman better than all the other superheroes?

It's because the entire equation has been reversed. Take, for example, the quintessential superhero, Superman. Superman is a super-powered freak, and his nemesis, Lex Luthor, is an extremely wealthy genius. This is the model that we will find most superheroes following. But not Batman. In the case of Batman, Bruce Wayne is the extremely wealthy genius, and the villains he fights are the super-powered freaks. The whole paradigm has been turned over. Batman is the best because Batman is different.

Rule #4 - Do not advance the narrative with flashbacks. Flashbacks are just lazy. A responsible writer can reveal past events without them. Did George Lucas show Darth Vader getting busy with Luke Skywalker's mother? Well, yes, sort of, in the second trilogy, but everyone knows that the second trilogy doesn't count because it sucked. No, the famous line is "I am your father." Showing a flashback at that point would have taken all of the emotional punch out of the moment.

Some of you are thinking, "what about my favourite JRPG with the hero who has amnesia? You have to use flashbacks when the hero has amnesia." Yes, it can get taxing trying not to use flashbacks when dealing with amnesiacs. Here is a simple solution though: Don't use a hero with amnesia! It's overdone, cliched, and boring.

Rule #5 - Have a clear narrative leader. Sometimes you have to follow different people's perspectives to tell the whole story, or to build the suspense. But you should never do this for too long. There should be a main character whom the reader (or player, as the case may be) follows more-or-less consistenly. And never, ever, EVER change viewpoints in the same scene. In Terminator 2, the audience has been following John's perspective for virtually the entire movie. Suddenly, in one scene, immediately after he has a moment in which he teaches the Terminator to high-five, Sarah starts narrating. It throws me for a loop every single time. It doesn't ruin the movie, but it is unnecessarily sloppy writing in an otherwise above-par movie.

Rule #6 - Have a clear final goal. I have played a number of RPG's that set up a goal in which I invest myself, and then, once I have accomplished said goal, I find out that the game isn't over. Breath of Fire II for the GBA is the most egregious example of this. I spend at least a dozen hours trying to clear my companion's name, and then, once I've made him a free man again (or a free dog, as the case may be), the game keeps going, with no new objective in sight. The goal that I have come to care about is complete. You can't expect me to start caring about something completely unrelated. And you especially can't expect me to care when the new goal isn't proffered IMMEDIATELY.

Rule #7 - Action is no substitute for substance. Obviously, this rule doesn't apply too much with videogames or movies. I have had a lot of fun with Darksiders so far, and it hasn't the faintest pretention to telling a good story. As long as I get to cut up huge dudes with a gigantic sword, I'm happy. But when writing a story, gunfights and explosions are the worst kind of filler because they require no effort to create. Tolstoy has long been regarded as one of the greatest writers that ever lived, not because he wrote about war, but because he wrote about the people behind the war. The soldiers, the generals, the czar - their thoughts, agendas and dilemmas.

Rule #8 - Use zombies responsibly. I love zombies, from the classic Night of the Living Dead automoton to the 28 Days Later shrieking variety. But I've noticed a bothersome trend of late: Everyone refuses to call them zombies! In Left 4 Dead, they're Infected; Max Brookes (author of the Zombie Survival Guide) refers to them as Ghouls; the last two Resident Evil games have called them Ganados and Majini, respectively. In the romantic comedy 'Shaun of the Dead', when Shaun's sidekick calls the zombies by their proper name, Shaun rounds on him, insisting that he not use the 'Z' word, "because it's ridiculous." I am beginning to suspect that there is a universally known zombie joke to which I am not privy which is being referred to every time zombies are mislabeled, and I'm the only one who doesn't get it. However, if this is not the case, there is no reason to not call a zombie a zombie.

Let me break it down for you: If a person starts out normal, and then, subsequent to some sort of contact with specimen X, begins to display similar behavioural patterns - namely an irrationally violent and uncontrollable compulsion to cause physical harm to persons who have not come under the same influence as themself - then specimen X is a zombie. Plain and simple. The specifics of the physiology do not matter. Running or shambling, scared of fire or completely undeterred by a hail of gunfire, infected with a virus or host to a parasite, if they used to be human and are now trying to take a chunk out of you, they're a zombie.

Rule #9 - Never, ever, EVER, use the 'it was all just a dream' twist. I will curse Tom Cruise 'til the day I die for making 'Vanilla Sky'. 'Nuff said.

Rule #10 - Get creative with names. I've been playing Divinity II: Ego Draconis recently, and while reading up on the backstory, I noticed that the character representing the side of good was named 'Lucian' ("bringer of light," for those who don't know), and the character representing the side of evil is named 'Damian'. While I understand the desire to stick with archetypal names when dealing with archetypal subject matter, a little extra creativity rarely goes amiss...and there is absolutely no excuse for naming your wizard character by the 'start with a 'Z', then go nuts' method.

Worthy of note is the character Morrigan from Dragon Age: Origins. In Irish mythology, [the] Morrigan is a goddess of sorts, associated with war, death, and fear. It has been postulated that the 'mor-' in her name shares the same etymology as the '-mare' in 'nightmare'. Before the Battle of Mag Tuired, she is said to have offered victory over the Fomorians by means of magic in exchange for a certain service rendered to her by the ruler of the Tuatha De Danann. Those who have played Dragon Age can probably hazard a fairly accurate guess as to the nature of said service. Some might ask, didBioware's writers pick the name to suit the story/character, or did they write the story/character to suit the name? It doesn't really matter either way. Anyone who knows about the Irish Morrigan would be able to immediately divine Morrigan's role in the game. This isn't always a bad thing, but in a story-heavy game it can be disastrous. They should have taken the time to come up with a better name - perhaps not as fitting, but certainly less revealing.

More to come in future...maybe....

[tags: writing, dragon age, tolkien, serenity, batman, superman, flashback, george lucas, darth vader, star wars, terminator, breath of fire, darksiders, tolstoy, zombie, left 4 dead, max brookes, resident evil, shaun of the dead, tom cruise, vanilla sky, morrigan]