Opening.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Perhaps turning it into a supertrope could work.
I'd like to apologize for all this.
Gentleman Troper!
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
How is it a supertrope? This page is about a medium (i.e. video games).
Turn it into a redirect to Plot Twist, maybe?
Sounds good on paper (he/him)
That might work.
Veteran Editor IV
With what the trope is used for, may as well redirect it there.
Currently mostly inactive. An incremental game I tested: https://galaxy.click/play/176 (Gods of Incremental)
The wick check is lacking as only 35 examples were sampled. Here's one category missing from OP's analysis:
The interactivity of video games and visual novels allows for a new way for creators to mess with the player's head which is different from passively received media like a movie. Everyone who played The Stanley Parable should know what I mean. The game is always one step ahead of the player by knowing what actions you took. Not sure if there are enough examples to warrant a page but it certainly qualifies as a trope and it would fit the current page name and image.
I do feel like there's the potential for a trope covering the fact that games tend to establish a structure, a "set of "rules", within which the player interacts with them. When those rules are then revealed to be false, or are suddenly altered, it can, I think, create a shock not likely found in a passive medium.
This shock, I suspect, stems both from the immediacy of an interactive medium—there's less of a remove than in passive media—and from the presence of player choice—the player feels like a participant to some degree.
For example, imagine a platformer that instructs the player to only ever travel to the right. If it then reveals that the whole plot could have been short-cut had the player only travelled left right at the start, and if that actually works in-game, then the player may feel a little stunned, a little betrayed—and perhaps even a little culpable. After all, it was by the player's own choice that the original instructions were heeded; it was by the player's own choice that they didn't just walk left.
My Games & Writing
Gentleman Troper!
That is an interesting point; it does appear to be covered by the trope Video Games and Fate (about the freedom of the medium), and The Computer Is a Lying Bastard (about what the player can and cannot do).
In the case of The Stanley Parable, the countdown minigame that looks like and strongly implies it's winnable, but actually is NOT winnable, falls under Unwinnable Joke Game.
Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!
Hmm... As I'm reading the trope page, I don't think that Video Games and Fate would apply in that hypothetical example: That trope covers instances in which the game uses linearity as a thematic or narrative element. In this example, however, neither linearity nor free will are really brought up. Instead, it follows the second trope to which you linked, and relies on the player by convention trusting instruction given by the game.
I also note that the page for Video Games and Fate indicates that it crosses over with Playing The Player, noting that the latter involves deception on the part of the game, while the former needn't.
Indeed, a game that "plays the player" needn't comment on linearity or free will; it just has to deceive the player through the player's expectations regarding the medium.
A better example, perhaps, comes from the examples on the "Playing The Player" page:
In Heavy Rain, one of the playable protagonists is ostensibly investigating the killings that form the centrepiece of the plot. Based on the character's behaviour, it's reasonable to believe this narrative, and to play them that way. Indeed, I've seen a few let's players come to quite like them, I seem to recall.
However, it's eventually revealed that the character in question is the killer themselves, and even committed one murder just off-screen, between moments in which the player was controlling them.
The game deceives the player regarding the nature of one of the player's characters, allowing it to pull the rug out from beneath the player regarding the identity of the killer.
(Whether it's well done in this case is another matter, of course...)
My Games & Writing
^ Does the game use a different technique to deceive the player than what's been used for plot twists in other media like a movie?
Edited by eroock on Jan 1st 2021 at 5:13:49 AM
Heavy Rain, you mean? If so, then... sort of:
You see, the game gives the player access to the character's responses, including I think those made in private. Furthermore, it gives access to the character's thoughts. All of these are tailored to suggest that the character is a "good guy".
But perhaps more, there's a certain expectation in a game like this that, if not specified otherwise, the player it taking the part of one of the "good guys", I think.
And I think that it may be to a large degree those expectations—that the player character is a "good guy" unless specified otherwise; that the player-character's actions are "good" unless specified otherwise; and that advice from the game is in the player's interests unless suggested otherwise—that distinguish the effect of this trope from the effect of similar tropes in passive media.
Where do those expectations come from?
I'm speculating, but I'm guessing that part of it is that the player is controlling the character, and many people, I suspect, want to think of themselves as the "good guy". So when a game doesn't present a player-character as "bad", the player tends to think of them as "good".
Similarly, each game has its own rules, separate from our reality. So to some degree the player relies on the game (and past experience) to specify those rules. Thus a game that deceives the player on the rules can slip under the radar with particular effectiveness, perhaps.
[edit] Ooh, I've spotted another good example on the trope page:
The entry for The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening indicates that it presents a case in which the player is acting to effectively destroy the world and all in it—and that the only way to avert this is to stop playing—to not engage. Something very counter-intuitive, I feel, and potentially unsatisfying.
Now, one could say that this is similar to stopping a movie at a desired end-point. However, since the events of the movie don't generally involve the viewer, it would be reasonable to presume that those events happen whether viewed or not. In a game, the player takes part in the events, in a sense, and thus one can argue that things don't happen if the player stops making them happen.
Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Dec 27th 2020 at 3:58:46 PM
My Games & Writing
Gentleman Troper!
I would say that in other media, commonly, the reader or watcher wants to identify with the main character, and want to think of the main character (and by extension, themselves) as the "good guy". Especially if the main character is an everyman, or a blank slate, or has an unspecified past. So when a book or movie doesn't present a main character as "bad", the player tends to think of them as "good".
And then, it can easily be a shock when it's revealed that the main character is in fact evil. The thing is, we have a trope for that: Tomato Surprise.
I don't feel this is substantially different between books and video games. It may feel that way if you're really into video games and don't consider books to be that immersive, but that strikes me as Fan Myopia. Likewise for movies and other media. This is why I'm saying that Tomato Surpise But For Video Games shouldn't be a separate trope.
Edited by Spark9 on Dec 27th 2020 at 6:36:36 AM
Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!
And yet I love books, and think that they're amazing. I've long had a great love of reading.
But still, what we're describing here very much feels different to the experience of Tomato Surprise in a book or movie, to me.
While a reader may identify with a protagonist in a book, they don't feel as connected—not in the same way, or to the same degree.
Things that happen to a book-protagonist may affect us deeply, but they still feel like they're happening to someone else. And when a book-protagonist does something untoward, it might shock, but there's no sense of reflection on us.
When a game-protagonist does something shocking, it feels more like it reflects on the player.
Or to put it another way: when a book-protagonist does something shocking, the reader thinks "What have you done?!". When a game-protagonist does something shocking, the player things "What have I done?!"
Not to mention examples like the Zelda one, above, which just don't seem to me to work as well in a passive medium.
Plus there's still the "rules of the medium" argument, above. In a movie, there aren't rules to be learned about interacting with the work, or at least not to the same degree. This provides games with a means of subverting expectations that isn't available to movies and books.
[edit] If anything, I may not be arguing this very well—I'm rather tired as I write this. ^^;
Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Dec 27th 2020 at 6:35:33 PM
My Games & Writing
My take on the Playing the Player trope is "A game subverts the player's expectations by making the Genre Savvy option result in something other than helping achieve the player's/player character's objective."
For example, in Danganronpa: Trigger Happy Havoc, the player has been coached throughout the first four mysteries that being honest at all times will help solve the mystery. In the fifth mystery, telling the truth instead of lying and covering for a classmate will result in a premature Game Over that skips the sixth chapter.
In Undertale, the savvy RPG player assumes that LV and EXP stand for levels and experience, and accumulating those things makes you better able to defeat harder challenges. Instead all it does is make the NP Cs antagonistic toward you.
Bravely Default does this by making the player characters doubt the instructions of their fairy guide, which itself isn't this trope; the subversion aspect occurs by purposefully presenting the player with the option to disobey the fairy's instructions, but then making the "correct" option be to obey the instructions so the party can have a proper final showdown with the end boss.
One example I am shocked is on neither Playing the Player nor on the work's own page (which makes me wonder whether I'm misunderstanding this trope?) is the secret ending of Far Cry 4. The player character (PC) has an objective, does not want to instigate violence, and is given an instruction by the "villain" near the start of the game.
- The genre savvy player expects that the only way to progress the game is to disobey the instruction, which leads into the action-adventure and shooting elements.
- However, if the player obeys the instruction, it triggers the secret ending, which accomplishes the PC's objective without instigating violence - arguably the "best" ending.
Sounds good on paper (he/him)
There's no such thing as a Genre Savvy player (or reader, viewer, etc.) — that trope refers to when characters know their genre's conventions due to in-universe works and act upon said knowledge. It's not simply about acting sensibly.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Dec 31st 2020 at 9:36:58 AM
Patiently awaiting the release of Paper Luigi and the Marvelous Compass.
Fine. Replace that sentence with "1) A Video Game trope 2) Where the developers expect the player to have knowledge of genre conventions 3) And subverts the player's expectations 4) By having a desirable outcome that requires the player not play according to these conventions."
Point stands. Are my examples both a) similar enough to be the same trope and b) distinct enough to warrant their own trope page, and if not, where would you put them instead?
It's distinct from The Computer Is a Lying Bastard because the game itself doesn't tell you lies — if you came into it with no preexisting expectations of the game, the twist wouldn't work.
Genre Deconstruction would seem to be the closest, with the relevant deconstruction being of a Video Game Genre's gameplay as opposed to a narrative genre's story (since the Video Games subpage includes examples where the gameplay is generic while the game's narrative has the plot twist). Maybe the non-Tomato, non-Evil examples can be migrated there?
Let me try to explain my own perspective again, with perhaps a little bit less tiredness now:
All games set up a set of "rules", the conventions or mechanics within which the player acts. These are the things that help the player to figure out what is possible and productive within the context of the game.
For a few examples: A shooter might have the player be invulnerable when behind cover; a "walking sim" might provide story-elements when the player encounters a wisp of light; a platformer might put all progression to the right.
When the game "plays the player", it subverts those "rules" in some way, either proving them false, or having them lead to a negative outcome. In some way, the game "tricks" the player.
To build on those examples above:
- The shooter might have a hidden timer that leads to a bad ending; if the player takes the time to stick to cover, they'll run out the timer.
- The "walking sim" might reveal near the end that the wisps of light are in fact souls that the protagonist is consuming, learning bits of story as their memories are dissolved. The hidden "good ending" might come from refusing the temptation to learn the story.
- The platformer might have access to a "good ending" hidden to the left of a level's starting point.
Now, the second does involve a Tomato Surprise. However, I don't think that it's entirely covered by that trope because said trope doesn't include the element of player agency: the fact that the player is suggested to be "complicit" by virtue of having actively taken part in matters, and having—unwittingly perhaps—"chosen" the bad ending.
That, I suppose, is what the "playing" means in "playing the player": it's getting the player to act in a way that's likely counter to their preference by virtue of being deceptive about the "rules" of the game.
I'm not sure that I'd really call that "playing the player": there's no sense that the game has "tricked" the player in any way. It's just a secret ending gained by unexpected realism.
My Games & Writing
Video Games may be more immersive but I still think the difference to other passively consumed media is in the grade and not in the category. The more intense identification with the player character adds up to more of any trope you want to apply like Tomato Surprise.
Edited by eroock on Jan 29th 2021 at 4:04:56 AM
How sweet it is
Clock is ticking!
she/her | TRS needs your help! | Contributor of Trope Report
It really doesn't seem so to me—to my mind it's very much a qualitative difference, not a quantitative one. Perhaps we should agree to disagree on this; our arguments are present in the thread for others to make up their minds on, after all.
[edit] Sorry for the delay in response—this thread seems to have slipped past my attention! ^^;
Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jan 30th 2021 at 1:24:16 PM
My Games & Writing
How would you define that qualitative difference as a trope?
I think that I had a shot at doing so in this post.
(If that doesn't convey my position sufficiently well, then please give me a day or two to return to this: I'm very tired tonight. ^^;; )
[edit] Actually, let me try this formulation, too—although noting that, being rather tired, this may not work, and may incur rambling: ^^;
When one engages with a work in a passive medium, one is essentially an observer of a world.
There may be surprises in the narrative, but fundamentally there tend to be few surprises in the audience-member's relationship with the work. The audience-member's reality, in a sense, remains separate from that of the work, and thus tends to be untouched by it.
(By which I don't mean to suggest that the audience-member is unmoved by the work—only that their engage with it doesn't change significantly.)
When an the audience engages with an interactive medium, they more or less take part in the world of the work. They learn how that world works, its rules, and this informs a sort of sub-reality that the audience-member works within.
When the work then reveals that the rules in question were untrue, this shakes the audience-member's understanding of the reality within which they're operating, and of how they engage with the work. They're tasked with adapting their perception of that reality and engagement, and adapting to it.
This is something that, it seems to me, passive media tend to not provide. (It's probably not impossible—I wouldn't be surprised to find some non-video-game examples—but passive media aren't as well-equipped to do it as are interactive media, I feel.)
Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jan 30th 2021 at 9:01:29 PM
My Games & Writing
Gentleman Troper!
Crown Description:
Playing The Player is not a trope. Rather, as a wick check shows, it is a collection of video game examples of Plot Twist and a number of subtropes thereof.
This purports to be a videogame-specific trope that a game subverts the player's expectations. There are two problems with that. First, it is a very broad definition. Second, subverting expectations is clearly not limited to video games.
Pretty much all the examples are a Plot Twist, predominantly that either the main character is revealed to be not who/what you think he was, or that the main character's allies or boss are actually evil and/or the Big Bad.
But we already have tropes for that. For instance, if the main character isn't who you thought it was, that's Tomato Surprise; and Tomato-Surprise-but-in-a-video-game is not a different trope. If your ally turns out to work for the Big Bad, that's either The Mole or Evil All Along; and again, The-Mole-but-in-a-video-game is not a different trope either. Of course, Tomato Surprise and The Mole and Evil All Along already have numerous video game examples.
Totals:
Verdict: this page is not, by itself, a trope. Rather, it is a collection of video game examples of a handful of other tropes. The examples on this page all belong under Tomato Surprise, The Mole, and a few others; and this page should be cut.
Edited by Spark9 on Nov 30th 2020 at 2:33:30 AM
Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!