Categorizing Experience-based Design: Thematic Transportation

If you skipped my post on other models, here's a quick takeaway. Immersion can be divided into absorption and transportation. Absorption is related to flow theory (which I classify as less of an emotional state than a state of altered consciousness). Any game can be absorbing, so I don't use absorption when looking at how to divide game experiences. Transportation is a reference to narrative transportation theory, the idea you can get "lost in a story" or "enter a game world." Now, let's get back to emotion-based experiences.

The second category of experience-based/emotion-based games is thematic transportation-driven design (TTDD). I use the term ‘thematic transportation,' because ‘narrative transportation’ has a distinct literary definition that implies the existence of a traditional story structure and text or script that I do not think is required in order to achieve transportation into the world of a game. Where thematic transportation differs from narrative transportation theory is that both the ‘narrative’ and the characters can be minimally developed and still create a sense of leaving reality. Narrative transportation theory requires players to experience empathy and mental imagery in order to experience suspended reality. (According to scholars, read more here.) From the standpoint of reading a novel or playing D&D, this makes sense. However, when playing a game or watching a movie, imagery is largely provided visually. Perhaps this is an impediment for these genres that they have to overcome to achieve narrative transportation, but it does not seem that way. I allow mental imagery as an optional aspect of thematic transportation, but I place emotional simulation as the required element. Emotional simulation is players having an array of feelings that match what the characters would be feeling when experiencing the events of the game. This also diverges from the definition of empathy found in narrative transportation. Empathy in narrative transportation involves feeling the emotions of the characters, or bleed. In board games, players may or may not experience bleed from the characters. Players may not identify strongly with a character. Indeed, the characters may not be more than simple portrait art. The reason this diverges from (this definition of) empathy is that players do not have to pretend they are acting as another person. Often in board games, the players experience the emotional content of the game as if they were characters in the world, similar to the process of an actor doing a "magic if" exercise—"if I were in this situation, how would I feel?" The difference is that emotion in narrative transportation theory is created by looking in from the outside. Actors create emotion internally that gets expressed outwardly. However, actors use concrete items and actions as fuel for characterization. Many actors will insist on rehearsing in their character's (literal) shoes because how someone moves is directly connected to how they display emotion. In games, mechanics can act as character shoes, providing a structural reinforcement for an emotional journey. So, regardless of whether a game has a full narrative, if the players go on an emotional journey that mimics the story arc or thematic arc of the game, thematic transportation has taken place.

When designing TTDDs, thematic emotional content is prioritized. The emotions of thematic transportation games are more complex and subtle than emotion-driven games. There are three elements of TTDDs: thematic actions, scripted narrative, and evocative theming. These can be deployed singularly or in combination to achieve a TTDD. 

Often these designs seek to simulate an experience, to make the game task feel real and important to players. Simulative actions closely tie theme (and its emotional content) with mechanism (and its emotional content.) The actions of the game need to trigger an emotional response that helps build the ‘simulation’ of the world. As much as possible, sensory and mental input should be used to reinforce the veracity of the thematic world. Simulative actions are tied to suspension of disbelief and sensory feedback, real or sympathetic. A game about bomb diffusal, such as Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes, is thematically transportive without requiring the trappings of a narrative framework. By having emotionally-charged simulative actions, players feel as if they are actually accomplishing the tasks in the game. Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes is a video game/party game hybrid, however we can easily see the application to board games. It is a great example of simulative action in isolation from other TTDD elements: it has no scripted narrative and players play as themselves becoming the characters in the emergent story.

Some designs use scripted narrative to emotionally connect and ‘transport’ the players to the game world. Scripted narratives leverage the elements of narrative transportation, providing world details that encourage players to ‘enter’ the world of the game. Scripted narrative may appear as gameplay introduction lore, chapter breaks (similar to cut scenes in video games), or flavor text sprinkled throughout the game. The art and graphics of a game supply a supporting visual narrative that can add depth of detail without adding unnecessary pages to the ‘script.’ Campaign and legacy style games make frequent use of scripted narrative. 

Evocative theming is the element a designer can add to an emotion-driven design to get a TTDD. As discussed in the last post, in many EDDs, whether or not players engage deeply with the theme is largely dependent on a group’s proclivity. Evocative theming encourages engagement by providing relatable or exciting themes that stimulate the imagination. Anachrony takes loan mechanics from other euros and uses evocative theming to create a game with "time travel." Evocative theming focuses on how ideas resonate with players.

Intellectual themes, such as detective games where the primary focus of gameplay is logic, require extra world building and narrative building to be truly transportive. Certain mechanisms, such as logic puzzles, can easily push aside imagination in players’ brains. Likewise, the more math-based a mechanism is, the more emotional content the game requires to reach thematic transportation. Take for example, the Exit games and compare the experience to Time Stories: Asylum. Thematic puzzles alone can make a game exciting and absorbing, but are not transportive in the same way a well-crafted narrative is. 

In conclusion, thematic transportation-driven designs differ from emotion-driven designs through the specificity and depth of experience they seek to create. A design goal for an EDD might be to make players feel tense; whereas a design goal for a TTDD could be to make players experience the specific tension of diffusing a bomb. Whether a game is an EDD or a TTDD is largely due to how it is executed and what elements it includes to allow for transportation.