GIVING PLAYER A GAME'S BACKSTORY

author=LockeZ
That's really not totally fair, I know there are games where some of that stuff really does matter, and occasionally when I get really into a game I will actually care about some of the lore myself. But it should still be introduced naturally through dialogue and gameplay as it becomes relevant, just like in a movie, if at all possible. And if there's nowhere in any of the scenes where it's relevant enough to get mentioned, then... it has nothing to do with your game and thus should be excluded, if you ask me. There's a reason Lord of the Rings is one of the most popular fantasy stories of all time, yet no one would even agree to publish the Silmarillion until after Tolkien was dead, and even then his son had to self-publish it.

Hell, I couldn't even get into Lord of the Rings, at an age where I practically never put down a book unfinished, because of Tolkien's issues with shoehorning lore in where it didn't fit the context and pacing of the story. He was great at coming up with the lore, and created a far more developed and cohesive world than most of his imitators, but he wasn't that great at knowing how to introduce it.

In general, I think it's good to know more about the background of your story than you'll ever actually write. When you write with that background in mind, it'll come across as hints which suggest a deeper, more developed world, and the measured doses will help keep the player curious for the amount that they get.

My personal preference?

Tell the player only what they REALLY need to know in scenes.

For the more interesting bit, I use NPCs.

It gives them stuff to talk about, for one thing, and people will be talking about the world they inhabit.

Like...Here's an example from my own game:


You can also use some scrolls or books if you need, but NPCs are often the best way to do it.

Well, I guess what I really meant is that there are ways of incorporating the story into the gameplay, with or without text, and I prefer those.

Controllable flashback scenes are one common method. Just because you have a flashback doesn't mean the player has to lose control. It's kind of heavy-handed compared to weaving the story into the main gameplay, but sometimes they're perfect when you want to draw major attention to a particular past event. (Though even if I'm just watching it as a cut scene, I almost always prefer a flashback to a text description.)

An example of a game just weaving part of its backstory into the game seamlessly would be... the Kokiri forest in Ocarina of Time, I guess? At the beginning of the game, it's not obvious what the Kokiri forest is. There are a bunch of kids there with fairies, and there's a giant talking tree. You don't know the history of the tree, or of the forest, and you don't know that it's unaging. And you're never told. But what does happen is you come back, seven years later, and it's the only inhabited place in the world that's exactly the same. Every other town and settlement in the game has been destroyed, sealed away, is under attack, or has become filled with refugees. But everyone in Kokiri Forest is still a child, still talking about the exact same things as they did seven years ago. And a new Deku Tree has been born. You don't need to be told that this forest is eternal and unaging, as are its inhabitants, and that these children are able to exist in secret, under the protection of the Deku Tree, oblivious to the horrors outside. You can see it. You don't have to be told that only the chosen can enter or leave the forest, because you can see that it's untouched by Ganon, and you can try yourself to leave through the Lost Woods and discover that you get teleported back the the beginning if you take a wrong step; you're only guided through by listening to Saria's singing. Everything about the lore of the Kokiri Forest is made clear without any of it being told to you.

When possible, this is how I think backstories in video games should be told.

author=LockeZ
...There's a reason Lord of the Rings is one of the most popular fantasy stories of all time, yet no one would even agree to publish the Silmarillion until after Tolkien was dead, and even then his son had to self-publish it.

That's funny cause the Silmarillion is my favorite of all of Tolkien's works, I love that book.

This is a very good 'discussion' on the topic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otAkP5VjIv8

If you don't know what Extra Credits is, then you're missing out on some of the best information on game theory there is out there.

The particular episode I'm linking, talks about MMO Quest Design, which at first you might be thinking will not have much to do with lore, but they go on to talk about how one might go about revealing lore through gameplay.

If you're gonna bring Extra Credits into this discussion, go watch the very first episode! It's about exactly what I talked about earlier: using the gameplay to fill in the story instead of using giant cut scenes and walls of text.

Typically, telling the player the lore works best when said lore becomes relevant. Relevant lore is the least likely to be boring and most likely to also be remembered. If you have additional optional lore, then the player is the most likely to be interested in the part of the optional lore that's related to the relevant lore recently obtained. If you feed the player some lore needed, then searching around the place you got the lore should give you more information. If this happens in a town, then talking with NPCs should give you more lore and if it happens in an ancient ruin, then maybe there's ancient carvings or whatever dispensing lore.

I would not concentrate a piece of lore entirely to a single region though. It can be fun returning to an earlier place and realize that lore which didn't seem very important at first suddenly have a greater/new meaning now that you know things you didn't before. Clever writing can make lore that seemingly unimportant at first later turn out to be foreshadowing.