A Functional Perspective on Narrative in Computer Games - Wolf Maul

On the most basic level, the interface, as the bridge between the computer and player,
plays a fundamental role in how the frames are experienced. Interacting with a virtual world
through an input device and a graphic interface means an inevitable gap between will and
action. No current (or foreseeable) game interface can even approach the absolute transparency
of a real-world mode and range of input possibilities. The player’s engrossment in the fiction
frame is, however, effected by its relative transparency. Any difficulty in operating the game
interface, on either a physical or game level (if, for example, the icon structure is too
complicated or the required mouse control is too difficult) can divert the player’s attention
away from the fiction frame.
Riven’s interface was simple from the very beginning of play. The use of the mouse
pointer was intuitive and there were only a few symbols and very basic game-play to
understand. The much greater complexity of Baldur’s Gate’s interface was initially much less
transparent because of the large number of icons and menu screens used to control multiple
characters. There are, for example, 130 symbols representing possible character states such as
‘diseased’, ‘fatigued’, ‘poisoned’ and ‘blinded’.
Once I learned the interface better, however, the extra complexity in Baldur’s Gate
became in many ways more transparent because it allowed a more natural range of possible
actions. Within a few hours of playing Riven, on the other hand, the interface’s simplicity
became somewhat frustrating because it inhibited my ability to act as I wanted.
Even after Baldur’s Gate’s icons and actions became manageable (and therefore more
transparent) during leisurely paced play, they could rapidly become overwhelming when the
rate of play increased. For example, during large battles in Baldur’s Gate, the volume of
29