Email interview with Jordi de Paco of Deconstructeam about the Red Strings Club

Video is live, watch that first! This is a public post, so if you comment the public can see your username and comment.

Wendal:

 Hi! Thanks for responding to me on twitter. I'm Mr Wendal on there  and on youtube, but my real name is Ryan REDACTED. Call me Ryan.

I  have a lots of questions about the Red Strings Club, specifically its  conversations (the middle, Donovan part of the game.) They were the most  engaging game conversations I've ever had.

I have a general idea  of my "thesis" for the essay, but I want to get your input first. Also,  I can't 100% guarantee the essay will work out in the end, not all  projects make the distance. Sorry.

Do you  want a list of questions you can answer all in one email, or to run this  more like a conversation, where I ask you a starting question and see  where it goes from there? I'm partial to a conversation, but if you're  busy, a list (or a voice call) might be more convenient.

Thanks so much for taking the time to email me!

Jordi de Paco:

Hello Ryan!

Nice to meet you. Feel free to write me your questions in any pace and order, hahaha.

To begin with, I can summarize the key points of how I degin conversations:

- I try to ensure a decent ratio of interaction per minute so it doesn't feel as a Visual Novel.

-  Every interaction must be significant. That doesn't mean that all  decisions must have consequences, but they have to feel as if they do;  the game happens in the head of the player, after all.

- As a general rule, if a question can be answered in less than 3 seconds it isn't worth asking.

-  Avoid backtracking as much as possible, unless you can make it  interesting. Many dialogues in adventure games just feel like selecting  topic after topic to read what the writer has in store. In The Red  Strings Club I made this process interesting by having the player decide  which mood to set before tackling each topic.

- Weave the  player's input into the dialogues. It seems like a silly trick, but  having the characters mention things you've done and said generates a  great deal of agency. "I know you're not in favor of X, but..." or  "Since you said X, you'll agree that..." are two ways of starting the  same line (that ends up offering the same information), but includes the  player's input in its structure, making them feel relevant.

-  Dialogues must serve more than one purpose. Expositive dialogues are  boring; explicit feelings are bland ("I am angry", "You should be  afraid"); developing themes can be too alienating. When a conversation  hits two or more of those aspects simultanouesly is when, in my opinion,  become substantial. Quick example, a character being proud (emotion)  about their project (exposition), while the subtext is tackling free  will (theme).

Hope this helps, and again, feel free to ask me anything!

Wendal:

Thank you! Very interesting stuff.

> having the player decide which mood to set before tackling each topic.

I  really liked setting moods, because it made "WHEN" I asked something as  important as "WHAT" I asked. I couldn't just pick all the fruit on the  dialogue tree one by one, I had to think about who I was talking to and  what moods would lead them to giving me to better information. I'll get  back to this, but first, what is important to set up before a  conversation takes place?

Jordi de Paco:

Purpose.

I feel that writing dialogues at random can lead to  redundant content, uninteresting sequences, and especially, poorly paced  developments.

Why am I writing this? How does it add to the  narrative and themes, and where does this lead. How does it affect the  development of the story, what does it tell about the world and  characters, and make sure it is something crucial to the experience.  Does it add or subtracts to the kind of experience I want to make the  player live?

Now, in a linear game as The Red Strings Club, this  is easier to control since you can structure the order of these  conversations as you would do on a movie or a book, even if they are  interactive.

But it is also important to bear in mind the purpose  of every conversation in a sandbox game or any other non-linear  narratives. Because even if you pick the pieces of the puzzle in a  different order, all of them should form the same picture, push towards  the same direction.

Wendal:

Should the player know their goal, what they want to get from this  conversation, before they start it? Or is it more exciting to have the  player's goals be more fluid and reactive? Or are both approaches valid  in different situations?

Jordi de Paco:

I'd say that as a rule of thumb the player should always be aware  of their objectives. In my experience, disoriented players usually end  up frustrated. Even if they are supposed to play around and set their  own objectives, they should be aware that this is what it is expected  from them.

On the other hand, I think there are not absolute rules when about talking game design.

You may be interested in creating frustration or make the player feel lost.

In any case, the designer should always bear in mind how they want to make the players feel.

Wendal:

Thanks!
I feel most game  conversations revolve around the player character. The important  dialogue choices are all statements about who you are and what you're  going to do.

I feel conversations in The Red Strings Club are not about you (Donovan) and what you're going to do.  They focus on the NPCs.
Sure  you express your opinions, but understanding (and manipulating) your  "opponent" is mainly what the conversations are all about. It's about  asking questions, not making statements.

1. Do you agree? Was this your intention?
2. Is this why the NPC takes the left / center stage (most other horizontal 2D games have the player on the left)
3. Why take this approach?
4. Do you know of other games that take this approach? Any games that were an inspiration?
5. How do you make a game out of asking questions?

Jordi de Paco:

I wouldn't say The Red Strings Club is a game about asking questions, even if that's literally what Donovan does.

Any  question leads to a discussion, and Donovan usually has to defend his  opinions. Most conversations are actually designed to play devil's  advocate with the player. It doesn't matter what stance do you take; the  characters will always offer resistance, so the player has to do some  exercise around their beliefs.

About  the composition of the scene, this is something I always have to fight a  bit with most artists I work with. I know that the usual reading order  in western cultures is from left to right, and it makes sense for a  platformer, but, usually, I'm not too fond of player-centric designs.  For example, in the bridge scene with Johanna, the player character is  also on the right. That is because I want to give priority to the  subject of the scene, and most scenes aren't about your protagonism.

About  making a game out of asking questions... I don't think that The Red  Strings Club is different from most adventure games in such regard. In  most of them, you are inquiring, harvesting information from the  environment, even if your options don't involve a question mark.

Wendal:

Thanks! Very interesting. So ...

1. How do you make a game out of harvesting information out of people? How do you explore a character instead of a location?

2.  Can you fail in conversations in The Red Strings Club? If so, what are  the consequences for failure? What does having failure achieve?

3.  Why did you test or quiz players at the end of the conversation? Why is  it not always repeatable? How did players react to this?

4.  Why did you show the possibility space at the top? (The Red Strings?)  Why show players the path they took and the ones they "missed"?

5.  Did you want / hope / expect players to play through the game multiple  times to find different things and take different paths?

Sorry for the wall of questions, but this is helping a lot to put me on track. I think I was a bit off with my original idea.

Jordi de Paco:

1.

There's this spanish developer who explored the concept of exploring a character quite literally:   https://ludipe.itch.io/who-the-hell-is-tom

As  for me, I don't have a scientific way of doing this. I usually design  the narrative of the game and define what do I want to achieve with a  scene, but then, when I have to write the characters, it is a way more  visceral process. I roleplay them and see where the conversation leads,  sometimes topics change abruptly, sometimes they get angry, or you  empathize with your adversary... I've been directing tabletop RPG games  since I was twelve, so this is the more natural way to me to develop a  character... sorry I don't have a more technical insight on it.

2.

The  Red Strings Club doesn't have any fail states whatsoever. Worst case  scenario, if you perform poorly, you don't get to see some scene or  learn some juicy information, but the game always moves forward.  Punishment has always been a great way to create tension in a videogame,  but I don't think every game needs that, especially narrative-driven  games, in which game over screens can break the immersion.

3.

I  got the ideas for the quizzes from Final Fantasy VIII. I was playing it  while we were developing The Red Strings Club. FFVIII has this seed  exams built-in in the game menu, if you pass them, your salary goes up. I  went through all of them and had a great time because they felt like a  fan trivia, but also, that system made me aware of many things I didn't  know about the game's system and lore. Since the conversations in The  Red Strings Club were pretty dense, I translated that system to our game  to synthesize the information in an exciting way. For what we tested,  after players learned there was a quiz after each client, they started  being more attentive to the following conversations. You can repeat the  first quiz because it can catch players off guard, but after that one,  the tension is way better if you know you only have one shot.

4.

We  added the red strings visualizer a posteriori. The narrative of the  game has many variants, but I wasn't sure if the players were aware of  that, without the iconical Telltale signs saying "This character will  remember this." - I felt important to let the player know there were  many other options to reinforce their feeling of agency.

5.

Ideally,  I would like players to only play the game once, because that way feels  more magical, not knowing how many other options you missed. Replaying  the game may expose its systems and make the story feel more artificial,  especially with The Red Strings Club, which has only one ending.

Wendal:

So no fail states, but do you think the threat or appearance of  failing was enough to push players into paying more attention? Similar  to the way "after players learned there was a quiz after each client,  they started being more attentive to the following conversations"?

OK.  Last question. This one is purely for my own curiosity and is not for  any video idea I'm thinking about.Your memory of creating The Red  Strings Club has been erased, and you're playing through the game for  the first time as a regular player.

"I want you to know that I love you." or "Akara is a super AI that controls the world"?

Thanks so much for chatting with me! I will work on a script and keep you updated with how it goes.

Jordi de Paco:

Absolutely, yes. The threat of failure, even if just a sensation, it is  something desirable if you want to increase the immersion. Experiencing  and enjoying a video game happens in the player's mind, not in the  computer, the code or the design.

As for the last question... "I want to you to know that I love you," always. That is the most important.

Thank  you for this conversation, it was really interesting and helped me put  some thoughts in order! And sure, keep me up to date :)

Wendal:

I'm sorry! I couldn't let it go. The whole "game of questions" thing.

Starting  with what has the most visual impact (for youtube audience), I've  written a script that represents my personal opinions and experiences  playing the game. For balance, I've included quotes and references from  you where we disagree.

It's not final or anything, I can  change things based on your feedback. If you have time to give it a  read, I'd especially like to know if there are any factual errors in  there. And if I have misrepresented your statements or opinions in any  way.

Here is the script, if you have the time you can edit or comment it directly, or write a response in email.

Again, thanks so much for answering all my questions and helping me out.

Jordi de Paco:

This is great, thank you so much! 
Just spotted an issue: I don't know if EVA8 is a joke I didn't get, but the android is called Akara-184!
And in this quote:

“I wouldn't say The Red Strings Club is a game about asking questions, even if that's literally what Donovan does. Any question leads to a discussion, and Donovan usually has to defend his opinions.”

could we add "It's a game about being questioned." At the end? For the sake of clarity.

The script looks promising, thank you so much for making a video about our work :)