Embracing the fakeness.

The framing narrative of a simulation running on a holodeck in Bientôt l’été, allows for decisions that make design a lot easier.

If moving from one place to another is too slow, I can just switch to the “cyber-layer” and fly as fast as I can. Without having to invent a narrative excuse for super-human speeds on a French beach. Or when I don’t like walking in the night, I can just switch to day time by pressing a button.

Ultimately, though, I shouldn’t need this fictional framework to give the player interfaces like that. I mean: since we are already playing the game on a computer, we are already on the holodeck! Who are we fooling anyway? Nobody actually really completely believes that they are really present in that virtual world that the videogame projects, do they? So what’s stopping us from adding convenience to the interface, even if it leads to events that would be deemed supernatural by any creature who actually takes the virtual world for the real?

Just giving the player access to desirable functionality is far more preferable to twisting and turning your story to make such events plausible. You only end up making your story stupid. And this leads to far greater disruptions of immersion than simply recognizing that the player is using a computer.

This approach is actually very compatible with how I think of playing our games as voluntary activities. You first configure the game situation to your liking and then you enjoy. Our game does not need to persuade you. We make situations. You decide what to do in them. Like an idyllic spot next to the river or even a painting hanging on the wall: you decide if you want to enjoy it. And then you do what you need to get there.