19 Ways Gamebooks Fail Their Readers
I’ve spent bunches of time thinking about interactive fiction. In this article, I explore 19 reasons why interactive narrative often disappoints.
- Random luck determines the outcome of a choice.
is frustrating, boring to find the “proper” path, and bad fiction! - Choices encourage positive moral decisions only…
This approach makes all choices useless. A reader is no longer having an adventure. They’re completing a morality quiz. Yay. - …or are designed to subvert moral decisions.
World-building doesn’t have to mean purposely punishing the reader for their beliefs. Interactive fiction using this method results in reader confusion. - The story begins by asking the reader if they’d like to accept the adventure.
Navigating 30 pages of banal choices before the story kicks off is annoying. I bought the book. I want to play in this world now. Interactive media is best served in media res. - Many choices, no results.
Every choice shouldn’t be Earth-shattering, but if they all amount to nothing, then why provide the option? The appearance of a diverse world that is all smoke and mirrors is a betrayal to the reader. Choices should change the world, narrative, or reader in some way. - Lacking interesting narrative.
Most interactive fiction reads like an instruction manual, which is fitting because that is where it got its start. Having a story that is personal and with a gripping plot is rare. - Unique experiences are taken from the reader’s control.
Tension is building, the reader is excited, and then the climatic action begins…without them. Readers earn the right to make fun decisions and be offered diverse directions. - Confusing choices with emotion or intent.
Often readers are presented with preset choices, but how they react and rationalize these actions is wildly different. Prescribing emotion or intent to a choice robs the reader of autonomy. - Identical choices.
The potential of interactive fiction is enormous. If a reader is provided identical choices, they begin to fault the genre when they should be criticizing the unimaginative writer. - Identical dead ends.
The endings of an interactive story are a chance to reflect on the specialness of a reader’s journey. Crafting duplicate endings remind the reader that their choices amounted to very little. - Similar experiences.
When a reader makes a choice, it should be a contrast to the others available to them. Very often, interactive fiction allows for surface-level choices, all leading to the same experiences. Good fiction often changes the reader’s experience, providing the delight of exploring fresh elements of a fictional world. - Zero characterization.
Characters in interactive fiction are often cardboard cutouts. They exist to provide plot or to build the world, then they disappear. Interactive fiction readers deserve better. - No motivation.
Readers can be told the main character wishes something, but they rarely get to see why. Feeling it and hearing it are the difference between good and great experiences. - Criss-crossing choices.
When you make a series of choices, they often link nonsensically into another narrative path. This can be felt by a reader and nullifies the value of their individual decisions. - You.
The heavy use of second person makes the protagonist a ghost. They only exist as a MacGuffin, often having no backstory, characterization, or personality. Readers are shackled to this boring automaton throughout their travels. If the main character has a backstory, it should be selected by the reader. - Too many choices, not enough fiction.
When choices exist on every page, the reader becomes the editor. Choices are made not out of interest but boredom. Offering readers the right balance of story and interaction can be maddening, yet is an essential piece of a well-told interactive piece. - Deus Ex Machina.
Choices need to have value. Having the book take a hard turn to resolve a conflict or shoehorn in an alternate path is cheap. Removing agency from a reader’s actions is cruel and devalues their personal experience. Having this occur at the end makes the entire piece of fiction a waste of time. - Effective choices take reader effort.
Interactive fiction should give the reader a mental workout, asking them to define their personal viewpoint of more significant issues. What is the nature of life? What is truly alive? When is immorality okay? Are all crimes the same? Are all victories equal? All too often, the choices provided are literal. Left or right. Good or bad. Punch or kick. By forcing readers to choose between equally weighted circumstances, all without a simple answer, writers unlock the power of this medium. “Okay” fiction tells us a story about another world. Powerful fiction helps us better see our own world. - Make messy and memorable consequences.
Life surprises us. Rarely do choices align with their indicated output. Gray decisions should lead to unkempt outcomes that encourage further action. The joy of a living world is reduced when choices explicitly tell the result.
If you write gamebooks:
- Random luck shouldn’t determine outcomes.
- Choices that only reward moral positions...
- ...or to subvert expectations, are unrewarding.
- Begin in the middle of your story.
- Choices should produce a noticeable change for characters or the world.
- Think in plot.
- Significant events should be reader choices.
- Do not prescribe emotion or meaning to actions. Allow the reader to fill in these blanks.
- Vary the types of decisions made.
- Vary the types of outcomes.
- Vary the narrative.
- Allow the reader to choose who their character is.
- Help the reader experience why they want to achieve the end goal, not just hear that they should chase it.
- If a reader notices an abrupt plotting shift, then the illusion of world-building is lost.
- Main characters are more personal when the reader defines their backstory.
- Balance narrative sections and choices. Having the same cadence leads to burnout.
- Reader decisions should resolve challenges.
- Gray choices stay in hearts and minds.
- Tough choices result in untidy consequences.
This article is a modified version of a piece originally published on 10/12/2013 on RefreshingContent.com