The future of storytelling in video games.
polycounter lvl 12
Hey all, I've been thinking about this for a while now, and figured that this forum might be a good place to discuss it.
I'm sure we can all agree that video games are a very new medium for storytelling, and that there is a lot of untapped potential in them. Every medium has their strengths and weaknesses. What I want to know is your opinions on what are the strengths and weaknesses in regards to story telling in video games, as well as what should be avoided/improved in the future, to provide a richer gaming experience through story.
I'll start.
To me, it seems that the Video Game industry is in the transition stages between film and games. If you know about the history of film, you'll know that a similar thing happened during the transition from the theatre to film. Early films only used one static camera on one set; much like a theatre production. It took time for film techniques to evolve, and I'm going to assume the same thing will happen with games.
I notice in recent video games, is that the stories are often driven by dialogue heavy cutscenes, while this isn't necessarily a bad thing, I don't feel like i'm getting the full interactive experience I should in a game. Film and film making principles obviously have alot of influence on games, but by relying on cutscenes, video games are virtually becoming interactive films, which again isn't bad; but they don't seem to be using their interactivity to it's potential.
One thing video games have over film, is the player's attachment to their playable character. You see the world through your character's eyes, you become that character. I don't see enough games utilising that attachment. The best example I can give of it being used is the end of CoD4 (Anybody who'd played it will know what I mean)
So what do you guys think? Where do you think the future will take video games?
I'm sure we can all agree that video games are a very new medium for storytelling, and that there is a lot of untapped potential in them. Every medium has their strengths and weaknesses. What I want to know is your opinions on what are the strengths and weaknesses in regards to story telling in video games, as well as what should be avoided/improved in the future, to provide a richer gaming experience through story.
I'll start.
To me, it seems that the Video Game industry is in the transition stages between film and games. If you know about the history of film, you'll know that a similar thing happened during the transition from the theatre to film. Early films only used one static camera on one set; much like a theatre production. It took time for film techniques to evolve, and I'm going to assume the same thing will happen with games.
I notice in recent video games, is that the stories are often driven by dialogue heavy cutscenes, while this isn't necessarily a bad thing, I don't feel like i'm getting the full interactive experience I should in a game. Film and film making principles obviously have alot of influence on games, but by relying on cutscenes, video games are virtually becoming interactive films, which again isn't bad; but they don't seem to be using their interactivity to it's potential.
One thing video games have over film, is the player's attachment to their playable character. You see the world through your character's eyes, you become that character. I don't see enough games utilising that attachment. The best example I can give of it being used is the end of CoD4 (Anybody who'd played it will know what I mean)
So what do you guys think? Where do you think the future will take video games?
Replies
execution
style
entertainment
meaning (above all)
The strength of video games as a story telling medium, I would say, is its ability to enable all that film has to offer, but more. It's not really video games, but technology that does this, imo, these interactive aspects that can be injected into a moving visual, the result is what I'd call a video game or an off-shoot of what some would call interactive stories. There is a large cultural interest in this form of media as a whole, which makes this medium a viable vessel to sing your song. Looking at four parts I've chopped story into, I'd say it only helps with one aspect of story telling, and that's the entertainment factor. In a way, the video game benefits from a story the same way the story does a game. A game with a story is more entertaining, so long as the other parts are there.
On the other side, besides making the difficult task of executing a grand storytelling even more complex, I feel the main weakness is the dynamic nature found in video games, the immersion and game aspects that I see are inherently at the core of what I'd consider a video game. These are the aspect influenced by the player being put in control, goals and rules being involved. Looking at my quartered corpse of story, I'd say as a vessel video games hinders a story's execution.
I'd expect story telling to adapt, I'm not sure how, by using a new approach, like art and sound and programming had, for what video games are, in order to enrich the natural strengths the medium offers, rather than make a newer media conform to an older inadequate format. A game can be in many different shapes. I love me some good story in a game, but if I begin to feel it obtrudes, I will dislike it more than I would without a game being attached to it.
I guess this comes down to genres.
edit: Killingpeople has many good points.
Interactive digital immersion will never exorsize games.
The problem is the "video game" and that the majority of the best minds of artists and programmers are
happier then a fungal crab inside the rotting corpse of a beached whale with their immature dork profession.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingnut_Interactive
To tell a really good story, I think you need to have a fairly well defined story arc - much like a film or book would do. The downside being that this is extremely linear and the player just ends up playing out a pre-defined story (the Half-Life games are a good example of this, I think - well written games that are very linear in nature).
The extreme extrapolation of this idea is the sandbox sort of game, where the story usually ends up being a bit naff because it has to account for anything the player's done and also never feels involving enough because the player can wander off and do whatever he likes (games like Oblivion or Fallout 3 - the GTA games to an extent, too, but they never force the progression of the story so it feels a little more natural).
In my opinion, the best stories are told via a linear arc with a few branching paths (that don't go to the extremes of freedom that sandbox games do) that all get reigned in to certain "bottleneck" moments - points that all player must be forced to pass through so the story can progresses. That way you get the "play it as you like" part and the "good, engrossing and progressing story" part. (Good examples here would be Deus Ex, Bloodlines, Mass Effect).
Then there are other games which feel much more like interactive stories as opposed to games. Things like Fahrenheit, The Longest Journey, Dreamfall. Heavily character-driven with deep, interesting stories. I'd like to see more of this sort of thing. Let's hope Heavy Rain can push this sort of thing further along.
But so long as stuff like Gears of War and Halo continues to be the top selling games, I can't see much mainstream progress being made sadly. Although perhaps now the gaming population is slowly getting older, we may see some interesting things brewing. I think Mass Effect's done the best to push this sort of stuff forwards in recent years. It'll be interesting to see if Deus Ex 3 can do as much for interactive storytelling as the original did.
Whew, that was quite a rant, sorry. I spend quite a lot of time thinking about this sort of stuff :P
I'd love to see how far games like Half life / Bioshock etc can be taken, hell... I really enjoyed max payne and I've absolutely no qualms about playing a rigidly linear game thats done well. When i stopped to look at left 4 deads levels I was really amazed at how you weave your way through incredibly small spaces yet so much time is lost there, the appartments on No Mercy being a really good example of this.
The iGDA book on Game Writing discusses a lot of interesting concepts and its really worth the read. I feel like the novelty of Cut scenes has warn off for me, gone are the days where the graphics were shit and watching some pre rendered story footage was a treat. Games like Lost Odyssey / MGS4 have these really indepth storys with same old gameplay mechanics - so why not just write a fucking book?
If you want to convey something then do create a world and allow us to see it as is - arriving at City 17 for the and walking around/hearing it all first hand was so refreshing - it gave you a good idea of what sort of state the place was in without some NPC explaining it straight up. The Darkness also pulled off a pretty damn nice intro, which wasnt fully interactive yet it was handled really well... it really puts YOU in the shoes of the protagonist which is great.
Imho the worst story-telling is in the typical sandbox games (GTA, Gothic, Oblivion Fallout...) there you click through some more or less meaningfull dialogue and it's as boring as the pre-hitchcock movies where every story development was done via - set up a camera, have two persons talk with OBVIOUS HINTS repeating every half minute.
Example: Gothic 2 - there's that city and a HUGE ship is in the haven which is the most important subject in the whole game-world but instead of everyone being interested in it or running there to see it everyone's standing on the street just like puppets and the moment you press talk a completely emotionless text comes up "Have you heard about that ship, btw. my name is..., do you have any questions oh and HAVE YOU HEARD ABOUT THAT SHIP" and the very next character will do the exact same dialogue.
Characters in movies and games should characterize through what they do and not through a 600 lines dialogue you can't fucking skip. I really loved that scene in Half-Life 2 when Kleiner's searching for Lamaar as it really focuses on the character and gives information as a sideproduct rather than giving information and maybe characterizing as a sideproduct. Alyx screaming "Dad, dad" is much more emotion filled than a dialogue where you click through and on the click follows "He'd dad btw".
What most games lack as well is treating real topics. There are few games that talk about sex, love or trust in an emotional way or games that talk about why there's war and what's wrong about it. Movies are far more developed in that sector. Most games have a good story these days but it's depth and narratives are below soap-opera standards.
I think the big problem is that because games are immersive, the player can't watch and think at the same time, which is one of the big things that makes story what it is, in the form of a movie or a book. we can derrive meaning from our experience while we're watching the experience. games can't do that much.
however, games CAN offer new thought patterns. there's a reason why people who have grown up playing games are often very cerebral people.. because games are all about sorting and ordering events and information.. what to do in what circumstance.. etc etc. some people never developed those patterns because they didn't play games. it's not that they're stupid, they just dont have THOSE patterns.. and some partterns are better or worse for certain behaviors. thinking is NO good in sex. processing with your body is much better. obsessive atheletes probably fuck better than obsessive programmers.
i imagine a game with gameplay that offers specific thought patterns.... and story that promotes some sort of belief or behavior that is beautifully supported by the deep level thought patterns the game offers.. that would be a unified game.
unfortunately, most people in the industry have no fucking idea what a thought pattern is, or what anything else is that goes on between our ears. seccondly, i dont think most people actually really understand what STORY is, or why it's so important to our psychology.
story offers us, among other things (like new beliefs), new ways of behaiving to get new needs met. it has the ability to offer us new behaviors.. to uplift consciousness. I think STORY is probably one of the most important topics on the planet. more important than global warming... because it's by offering people a better story that they're going to change their behavior. its' everything.
wouldn't you know it, i wrote an article about it. this is a bit outdated, as i have a better understadning of story now, that includees the previous retoric..
http://www.videogamewoes.com/articles/story.htm
Games suddenly started to lose their appeal for me. My favourite genre was and still is the adventure game, although it barely exists today, and I suspect its demise was due to its emphasis on story rather than gameplay. These adventures were often made by designers/writers/artists who had backgrounds in fields other than the games industry. They brought something different and interesting to the table when this fledgling medium was still in its infancy but I think that the industry has outgrown their efforts. Gamers are looking for something else and story-telling in games has regressed as a result.
I am more convinced now than ever that our medium just isn't a good vehicle for story-telling as defined by other media. Its strengths lie elsewhere.
I think possibly a good example of where these strenghts may lie is the game Portal by Valve Software. It is very thin on story and yet manages to create an extremely interesting and immersive experience for the player. It manages to communicate so many ideas through subtle voice over and clues strewn throughout the environments. A very clever game in my opinion.
Just some thoughts. Agree or disagree? Hey, that's why we have forums.
I can honestly only think of 6 games that actually made me want to finish it for the story: Beyond good and Evil, Indigo Prophecy, Dreamfall, The longest Journey, Max Payne and, Psychonauts. Only 3 of those IMO got a good balance of story and gameplay: Max Payne, Psychonauts, and, Beyond good and evil.
I think the game industry needs to start looking towards the great writers and directors from other mediums such as books, comic books or movies. This is because as John Warner already said there is very few people in the game industry who actually know what makes a great story and how to direct that story.
I thought to myself that I dont want to write a huge post since this one is already full of them(not that they aren't excellent posts cause they are) but now look whats happened lol.
Portal tells a story very well, but (like all Valve games, sadly) it tells it as a film or book would tell a story. Cleverly and well crafted, yes, but it's distinctly linear (to the extent that Valve test and re-test their games to ensure that all players experience the same game and flow). It doesn't actually doing anything for games as a medium for storytelling. Which is a real shame as their character animation and interaction is second to none.
As John mentioned, the game should be about experience. A book or film can teach you morals or experience but it's all second hand. A game has the potential to teach you it first-hand. A really great game should tell you things about yourself and what you'd do should you be thrown into this certain sitution within these paramaters - first hand experience.
I remember spending about half an hour running around the last level of Deus Ex trying to decide which choice of course would be best for the rest of humanity (not to mention all the other points at which you're forced to decide what you'd do in a certain situation) because I genuinely couldn't decide which would be the lesser of the available evils. Bloodlines was the same, but in a more personal/political nature.
And if you're aching after good character-driven adventure games, I really recommend The Longest Journey and it's sequel Dreamfall. Can pick 'em up very cheaply on Steam.
The cry of "there are no good storywriters for games, we should start working with authors or screenwriters" doesn't sit right with me, either. Game writing is another discipline in and of itself. A good author or screenwriter wouldn't neccessarily know what makes a good game in the same way that a good game writer wouldn't be able to write a great film or book. I think it will take some time for the ground rules for game writing as a medium to be fully explored and laid out - there's only a few people with a handle on it at the moment but hopefully that'll grow in future.
Agreed. Portal is a linear experience but I believe Portal's strength lies in the way that it reveals its story to the player. It is using an interactive story-telling technique rather than a passive one.
Yeah I actually have a copy of The Longest Journey. I played part way into it but the characters and dialog just didn't grab me. The writing felt a little clumsy to me. I may give it another chance at some point. For my money you can't do much better than Grim Fandango. Sure it is a re-hashing of different movies, Glengarry Glen Ross amongst others, but it is well told and has charming characters.
"You can't make a pointless series of experiences and throw in a narrative component and claim that your game has a story, because it doesn't have a story; It has a whole bunch of shit."
Fuckin A. For me this is Fallout 3 summed up nicely.
actually, i'm totally with Mister sentient here about Portal. i personally don't mind linear stories, but linear or not, valve has a FANTASTIC way of pacing all the experiences that they give you, without ever.. cutting to a cut-scene. when you push away some bricks in a wall and find a little alcove where previous dudes have crazy stuff writen on the walls, it not only gives you some information about where you are, but it gives you a moment to reflect on what is going on and what it all means. hl2 ep.2 is fantastic for this as well, if you ask me. valve paces action scenes and drama scenes well, and offers a character there with you who actually responds to stuff that they want you to see "wow! look at that!" in this way they can control which events are meaningful, and later on they can give you pause to piece it together. it's still got a little bit to go, but what ever. i guess i am sorta ignoring the faults and promoting the strengths.
i think it's cool that the consensus here is that story in games isn't like story in books or movies... it'll be exciting to see what emerges as this industry matures.. i just wish there were more folks out there who were interested..
i have a feelign that the indie field is going to be where we see a lot of it. folks like us who just do their own thing. i'm almost done my first casual game now
Actually it would be unfair of me to say Fallout 3 is all shit. There are some really interesting aspects to it. For one the US governments use of the Vault program to carry out their twisted social experiments. Each new vault you discovered had its own horror story.
I just feel that the game doesn't work as a whole. Its kinda all over the place. Too many confused ideas fighting for dominance.
n a smaller level, I actually felt that lack with the vault thing. it was neat to wonder around in them, but i kept hoping for something in them to grab me, to jump out and pull me in somehow.. some meaning, point, purpose.. why should i care? why am i here? what can i do? can i make this change? can i do something about this? can i have ANY RESPONSE TO THIS WHAT SO EVER other than a tourist who's basically running through the vault like a disney-tourist carts his ass through a theme-ride at a theme park?
you know what? it does have that theme in a lot of ways. 3dog's idea of responsibility is to do the radio thing.. your dad thought it was more responsible to take care of you instead of project purity.. there's self sacrifice themes throughout.. but even so, the stuff that you do is sorta.. weak.
Wow, there's alot more posts here, than I thought there would be. Everyone is bringing up some good points.
Talon is saying exactly what I'm thinking. Linear stories to me, feel like interactive movies, where you play through the action parts. There's nothing wrong with that, and alot of my favourite games do this. What many of these games don't do is take full advantage of the player's 1st person perspective (not through the camera, but gameplay wise) or try to do anything about the linear progression through the game. Why can't there be variables which effect the outcome of the game? (many games are starting to do this, but not to it's fullest potential)
One of the main problems with video game story's is combining freedom and a good story doesn't work very well. The result usually ends up like one of those "Choose your own adventure" books from the 90's, where instead of having a full fledged narrative, you get a half-assed short story. I think that creative minds are just used to working on storytelling in a linear fashion, but future video games could change that way of thinking.
Another thing I would like to see in video games are the expansion of genres. At the moment, the best video game story's are comparable to bad sci-fi or action movies, which probably has to do with the medium's nerd roots; but could there be a potential for other genres of story to be told through a video game? Try and imagine a hollywood style romantic comedy, but made as a video game. Is it possible? With the casual and female audience growing, it could possibly have an audience, but due to the nature of current video games, I can't imagine how this kind of game could be made; but there is no reason why it couldn't.
What about a more deeper stories in games? Drama? Romance? Is it possible? Or is the game's industry destined become the new medium of choice for Action and Sci-Fi buffs?
( wuz gonna post here but exceeded the polycount character count limit )
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddb7qf9p_7f47w82d8
A lot doesn't hold water but I still like the idea of a fake system bugs, a fake multiplayer experience along with internet conciousness ( ghosts in the machine ) to move story
Once u leave behind the idea of game and werk on the problem as presenting an "experience" instead...
There seems to be an infinite amount of solutions..
Creating a story that werks and inventing a new language for a cinematic interactive experience seems to be the easy part... There seems to be no shortage of creative people with great ideas ( every idiot has an idea fer a great game )
The only roadblock is accessable technology ( a cinematic rehearsal engine ). and manpower ( hundreds and thousands of rehearsal takes )
One of the biggest problems with games is that the stories they tell are on the whole restricted to scripted sequences. The only way to get away from this is to offer a less compelling narrative.
But some of what Valve has been doing with Steam got me thinking. Valve's implementation of Steam enables them to get instant feedback on exactly how people play games. We're talking ridiculous amounts of information on playthroughs. What they looked at, how long they spent in any given area, etc... What if a game used that kind of feedback to generate a generalized psychoanalysis of the player, as they were playing? If a game can analyze the player effectively, based off of given interactive "tests," than the game should be able to dynamically adjust a narrative to fit the player's taste based on established writing conventions.
Writing, and game writing in particular, usually conforms to certain formulas. There's no reason why you couldn't mix and match with some of those formulas to come up with stories on the fly. This is even easier these days with the advancement of dynamically generated content. You could have the game craft an entire narrative based on feedback from the player. The player would essentially write the story that they would play through without ever knowing it. In this way a game could have a different experience for every player.
Now, the downside is that genuinely good writing relies heavily on creativity and a level of craft that a CPU just can't handle. So a game like what I'm describing would probably never live up to the literary standards of dedicated authors. However, I think that such an experiment is within the range of current technology, and could potentially offer up some surprising results. At the end of the day, I don't think most developers are using the tools at their disposal creatively enough. There is more potential out there.
It's balancing issue in my opinion. The designers have to relay complex information and I think it's just efficient time wise and resource wise to restrict interactivity while you're giving out info or setting up the drama. A lot of players would just run around the level if you give them control while giving out instructions or cutscenes. The extreme of course (i.e. too much movie) can lead to boredom.
What has everyone's experiences been like while trying to actually werk the problem?
( even failed ideas are extremely valuable )
Magic Sugar: restricting interactivity doesn't have to be noticeable. At times it can be built into navigation and position. As in film, you can tell much of the story with camera position, movement, and focus.
A fer instance...
The Climb
speed and distance of a climb is easily controlled/measurable
( a good oppurtunity for story dialog or cinematic advancement )
even if user decides to retreat from a climb there is always a "point of no return"
( the speed to retreat would be the same if allowed to finish )
at this point, the predictable time to complete the climb task can be used for cinematic advancement.
Facilitate the climb cinema with geometry that forces the character to face the viewer.
( facilitate experience of animation acting )
( screen pychonaut wall shimmy cinema ( slowey joey! ) )
similarily: The Bridge, The elevator, The ladder etc..
Conversely: The car "passenger" Ala Call of Duty 4's gorgeous assasination cinematic.
( where unlike a bridge walk, navigation is perceived to be restricted. )
Point and click as Direct User interaction
User doesn't have control over a "friend" only influence.
The metaphor of friend allows cinematics to be presented
without the user expectation of immediate navigation response.
This means the friend avatar/hero can take it's own time and respond for cinematic effect:
insult the players suggestions, blow off the user altogether or whatever wildcard is appropriate for
cinematic timing.
Granted, fer this to werk the avatar would have to be one hell of a charming friend.
My perfect story element from a game would be based around me. Now what I mean by that is I start my game, and maybe I have to answer a few short cryptic questions that discover what kind of a person I am, and then it tells the story as I would like to hear it. If I come off as a friendly, shy but team spirited guy then maybe I would take a path and a story that more caters to somebody like me. Likewise, if I come off as an asshole, then it would never give me the option of saving lives, because it knows thats not what I'm about.
I also like multiple choice plots, like Fallout 3 does, where you answer what you want to answer. I think those really help the game seem more directed at you, rather than everybody. Of course it would be awesome if the very first word you spoke would determin the plot for the outcome of the game. That would be really interesting to see.
Interesting although I think the fun/value in escapism can also lie in the ability to experience life from another point of view. Why not try playing a character who is radlically different to who you are in real life and challenge your preconceptions?
Of course the biggest advantage of all of this is with horror games. They could judge your response some how with a series of tests, and then make a game that shits you up even more.
True.
All depends really on what the purpose is of an interactivity "break".
I'm playing Red Alert 3 right now, same cheesy live action movies mixed with rendered and in-game movies. And I notice the tiers of the cinematics: 1) live action to set up the background; 2) in-game, to set up the level and mission before engaging opponents and conclusion movie to show effects of victory w/ a dramatic cam angle 3) rendered, to set up drama in a better graphics quality than in-game.
It's gonna be bad if in the middle of firefight you launch a momentum/adrenaline disrupting movie, so game play wise it's better to tack the movies at natural and logical break points.
If i break it down a bit I play games to beat them mainly... l4d for example id play it till i had each level done on expert, that to me is me clearing it and im content enough with that. Thats not to say I wouldnt replay it if I had some new friends who wanted to play through, but I probably wont play it anywhere near as intently as I did at first, regardless of the way its replayable.
Same for the HL2 series, when i was playing it through originally I wasnt doing it for the story, as afterall youre not really forcefed story. You go through ravenholm then hit up the traintracks on the otherside - storywise youre trying to meet up with alex again but that wasnt my drive. To me it manages to wrap you in the moment and you just keep progressing because its fun and youre just enjoying it.
Is it because there is context to your actions that makes it what it is? Or would the levels be just as good without the responsibility?
I really enjoy games like Trackmania and Stepmania which are stupidly replayable... not sure where I can take that point but yeah.
Deus Ex was fun and replayable because you can 'esc' through the intro, and rush in and out of briefings quickly and start immediate play and also go your own routes of play too
Escaping side quest stuff...sure, I'd let that optionable. Critical path stuff though...I'd make it sure I don't confuse the player. Maybe after a second play through, that's when you let the player go totally free roam without the need to trigger story or plot points.
Consider too that having non-interactivity can add to total game length: important in pr and reviews down the development road.
interactivity as pornography ( button mashing ) vs interactivity as art ( reflection )
neither is right or wrong many people don't even have the empathy to watch a movie twice.
wrong audience
because its completely open, you can basically play it indefinitely.
anyways, because its completely open, you make your own story as you go along.
there's no cliched "you start off as a farm boy, as your whole village is suddenly burned down by ravaging horde of orcs/goblins/lizard people, etc. and now you need to find the evil mastermind behind all this (usually a warlock/demon thingy) and in the process learn that you are the chosen one as you lop down hordes of creatures of various sizes and forms."
what you do in M&B is ride around and bash down hordes of deserters or bandits, sell their gear, and the bandits into slavery to buy you and your companions better gear, or buy armies to follow you, or buy influence with lords of nations.. you can even buy pardons from nations so that they will stop attacking you.
there's also various quests that base themselves on events in the game. for example, if there's a war between 2 countries, merchants in a town will ask you to stop the war between the nations, so that trade can resume. or on the flipside, if you become friendly with one of the warmongering lords, he will eventually ask you to raid caravans to start a war between nations.
there is an option of "retiring from adventuring" where you get a summary of what your achievements lead to after you laid down the sword, and then the end credits roll.
I personally love games with great, in-depth stories. Most of my favourite games involve story telling. But at the same time, there are lots of other games that I have gotten lots of enjoyment out of that have basically no story at all. (i.e. Super Smash Brothers Brawl)
Is one better than the other? Should one take supremacy and the other types should die out? No, I don't see any reason why we can't have really casual games as well as really deep story-telling ones. I like to have one plot-driven game going, with other lighter games to play at the same time.
With that said, for games specifically focusing on deep storytelling, I would love to see a lot of focus on telling a great story with detailed character developement, interesting plots twists, and stuff that can really make you think. At the same time, I don't want the gameplay to suffer. It would be ideal if the in-game stuff is still at least as enjoyable as the plot. If these could be combined to occur together... well, that'd be really impressive
For the field of story-telling I'm missing the fact, that my interactions in the virtual world really reflect on the character I'm playing and the story which takes place. There are examples of games which try really hard to give you the feeling, that everything you do as a player as it's impact on the story or the character you are playing. One example is Fallout 2 which doe this quite good I think.(haven't played the third part yet)
But there is one thing that strikes me when playing games which on the one hand try to offer a deep story and development of your ingame character and on the other hand try to provide you with a bunch of possibilities to act within the virtual world. Although I'm not trying to enforce a conflict between my characters role and the way I'm playing, there is often the case that I just want to act in the game like I'm not supposed to be.
Example GTA IV : You have this girl which you are in love with, but after a while you get to know that she just cheated on you, because she was working for some kind of guy from the government, FBI, CIA (whatever).
This treason braught you into real trouble (and some nice missions by the way) and when I was confronted with the situation I just felt like: She will pay for this. I expected the game to offer me the decision to take some kind of revenge. Would be a nice mission. Instead I was forced to continue the other missions and just let her get away. Well I might have my chance of revenge, but when? All the emotions the game evoked in the situation are gone when I have to play until the end, to maybe get what I wanted.
(I haven't completed the game yet, so I'm sure there will be something about this stiry in the end?)
So what I want to say is: Although my character is complete badass which in most cases doesn't give a sh** about the lifes of other people (except his family) I'm not able to find a traitor and take revnage for her treason, although ot' would perfectly fit to the behaviour.
On the other hand there might be players which have a totaly different approach to the situation, and would try to find her to gain more informations about the actions in the background of this betrayal, because they expect/know that she was forced to act against you.
All in all I would expect games to really take the choices within a story. Of course this is really hard to achieve in reference to the game development. Loads of different ways a story could develop.
But as we are talking about the future I would expect that the problem of nonlinear storytelling can be solved better one day.