LitRPG 'Core Aesthetics'?

This will be a rather half-baked post, but it's something I've been thinking about for a while.

This post was inspired by several of Extra Credits' videos about game design, mostly from "Aesthetics of Play - Redefining Genres in Gaming" and "Like a Ninja - What Makes a Good Stealth Game"

First of all, here's the gist of the videos:
Aesthetics of Play - people play games for 9 reasons:

• Sense Pleasure -- graphics, music, etc.
• Fantasy -- the ability to believe that you're someone else and somewhere else
• Narrative -- story line
• Challenge -- it feels good when you manage to solve puzzles or clear levels
• Fellowship -- group play, hanging out with friends
• Competition -- dominance, 'winning'
• Discovery/Exploration -- new ideas, sense of freedom, sense of wonder
• Expression -- customizing your avatar, gear, playstyle, etc.
• Abnegation -- zoning out
• [someone else added: 'Completion', which I think is a good one] -- the "I need to have them all!" mentality

Different games focus on different aesthetics of play, even when the mechanics are similar, so as a game designer you need to know what bits you're fulfilling. This means that categorizing games by mechanics, e.g. "RPG" or "FPS" might not help gamers find the games they will actually enjoy playing, if there is no mention of the aesthetics of play involved.

Stealth Game -- the reason why 'stealth games' done wrong are completely terrible is because the 'core fantasy' is not properly understood by designers. Action games touch on feelings of being empowered, having powerful guns, exerting your dominance. Stealth games touch on the fantasy of "triumphing despite weaknesses", "winning despite being less powerful", because the fantasy is about 'outsmarting' your enemies. Both are power fantasies, but they have different flavors.


How does this relate to LitRPG?

Okay, let's try to apply this to LitRPG.

@NoMan2000 has a really good post here: https://litrpgreviews.blog/2017/10/03/defining-litrpg/ where he discusses “What’s the appeal of reading a book about video games?”

I don't have answers for this, as I can only speak for myself. I'm sure there's a better framework for 'pop fiction aesthetics' out there, but since I haven't been able to find it, I'll base it off the 'video games aesthetics':

• Sense Pleasure -- prose, description, writing quality (some books are just beautiful and pleasant to read)
• Fantasy -- immersion, or the ability to believe that you're somewhere else (most 'sci-fi/fantasy' already do this)
• Narrative -- story, plot
• Challenge -- you enjoy watching how people solve challenges thrown at them
• Fellowship -- you love the characters and like watching them do things, and it makes you feel like you're 'hanging out with friends'
• Competition -- dominance, 'winning' (power fantasy, especially if you can identify with the MC)
• Discovery/Exploration -- new ideas, sense of freedom, sense of wonder; in books this might be closely related to sense pleasure, or maybe the 'novelty'
• Expression -- probably not a lot of this, since there's no interactivity when reading, but I suppose if you can identify with the MC, watching them 'customizing' their character can be interesting
• Abnegation -- you're in the mood for a fun, fast read
• ['Completion'] -- I don't think anyone would feel compelled to read all LitRPG just because it's LitRPG, but I do know a gamer who plays every FPS games, no matter how horrible, just because he wants to be able to claim that he has played them all. So this probably doesn't apply.

Here are a few more I'll add for LitRPG:

• Nostalgia: "I want a story that reads like a D&D game" or "I want something that reminds me of Vanilla WoW"
• System appreciation: "I want to play or can imagine myself playing the game described in the book"
• Progression: "I like the clear well-defined sense of direction/progression"
• Relief from 'real' consequences: "I like to be able to read about killing people without guilt, because it's just a game"

Then, there are kinds of specific 'contents' and styles that people look for (and lots of pet-peeve stuff that may or may not have anything to do with the stories):

• Fantasy / sci-fi world
• Base-building
• Apocalypse scenarios
• RL sections
• Unique abilities/class
• MC being OP or not OP (tied to power fantasy)
• Harems (tied to power fantasy)
• Low stakes / high stakes
• Think-y or feel-y
• Single or multiple POV
• 1st person or 3rd person POV
• Light or heavy crunch
• etc.

Now, if writers/reviewers can define their work by these aesthetics, and readers know what they're looking for, we can steer people to the right stuff. New readers coming in can also know what to expect and find the right books to read.

I'll use myself as an example. There are only four things I look for in books I read for fun: 1) a speculative setting 2) characters I actually care about 3) good prose 4) heartfelt emotional content.

Suggestion for aggregated reader reviews:
- Ask reviewers to name three things that they think the book did well (e.g. 'funny dialogue', 'love the MC', 'great plot', etc.) as well as three things that could be improved (e.g. 'pacing was rushed', 'nothing really new about the setting', 'mechanics not explained very well') Have these things be searchable
- Have reviewer profiles where they can list their 'favorite' stories, as well as discuss their general taste, and have a page where users can see 'books that received positive reviews from my favorite reviewers'
- Have explicit content tags ('OP', 'harem' and 'base-building' are big ones that people either want or not want -- and maybe a LGBT-friendly tag)

This is because I don't think a lot of amazon reviews are fair at all. There are a lot of "A well-written story but I couldn't stand the present tense! Two stars!" It will be okay if books get hundreds of reviews, but a lot of LitRPGs don't have that many reviews and a review like this can seriously hurt the author. A lot of negative reviews also come from poorly-managed expectations (not the authors' or readers' fault -- just the fact that people went in with different expectations and didn't get what they came for, since there's no 'warning', and you can't expect authors to put in the blurb something like "This turns into a harem story midway through", because that's not the place for that kind of information).

Okay, I'll stop rambling now.

 

I ... actually have read, or abandoned, every single book on Amazon that comes up when you put “litrpg” in the search bar and filter by Kindle Unlimited.

Yes. Every. Single. One. And the ones I’ve abandoned, I still read at least to the 33% mark, no matter how bloody painful it may be. The majority are ultimately forgettable, and I have duly forgotten them, but I’m reminded whenever I click “read for free” then open it up to read it and find that it automatically opens to the last page (or the 33% mark).

So I guess I’m the literary equivalent of that FPS gamer you were talking about, heh.

That said, I don’t think we can, or should, aggregate Amazon reviews like that. Now, we can ask for a keyword system to be put in (and you can always search reviews by your favorite reviewer), which I think would be feasible and doable. It would just need a script that parses reviews and looks for a match on a list of keywords, e.g. “harem” or “overpowered” and then displays them as tags in the review section. That’s a damn good idea for Amazon as a whole, not just Kindle, and you should call Jeff Bezos and suggest it.

Or rather, email him at jeff@amazon.com. Surprisingly, he does get the email that’s sent to that account. It’s got a robust spam filter, though, as I’m sure you can imagine.

 

LitRPG completionist? Okay, I guess it's a valid category after all!

I actually had this 'new impartial GameLit directory website that's supposed to be happening' and not Amazon in mind when I wrote the post, but, similar to what you mentioned, Extra Credits has a very good idea of making reviews searchable (for games, at least), so if a lot of people mention "good story" in their review, people can search 'story' and these games will pop up for them. Your idea is great, too, and if Amazon could automatically 'tag' a book based on reviews that would be really awesome. I still have a feeling, though, that AI isn't really smart enough to do this at the moment, and I've been disappointed time and again by all the "if you like X, then you might also like Y" recommendation algorithm. I just feel like nothing really captures the 'core' of what makes a book. I'd love a short one-sentence summary of what the experience will be like, such as "XYZ Online: fast-paced feel-good power fantasy with a likeable, moral MC and an innocent harem, mostly fun fluff, no real stakes" so I'll know exactly what to expect. And I'll know it's vastly different from "XYX Online: lots of gritty action and tension, realistic politics, morally gray characters, epic thought-provoking ending"

So to add to that thought, maybe the upcoming website, or Amazon, or whoever wants to feature reviews needs to do something to 'incentivize' quality reviews, because if a thousand people just say "good one", or "I like it", or "OMG this was amazing!", it's not going to help writers or readers find what they want.

 

Heyyyyy, that’s what we should change the currency to next: DKP.

I think that’s what the tag lines on reviews was supposed to be. The problem is the same thing that happened to Steam when they stopped being so strictly curated: they let the public have a hand in things.

 

Just my thoughts on the way you defined stuff here because i think you misdefined a few things or left them blank

The original terms you used are verry dense there suposed to be as few catagories as possible most of your additions can fit under one of those terms

Also just a short thought exploration is world building

Spoiler: long rambleing words here

I get what your going for with this one but i think your missunderstanding the meaning of competition competition isnt just about winning its about wining at something really hard its not fun to play a competitive game vs people you can easaly beat whats fun is playing vs people who are just as good as you beating them and then fighting harder people

This is why shonen anime never let the main character win because its not about winning its about the story of challenge that comes to overcoming your foe and once there are no more difficult foes or no more ladder to climb theres no fun in it
(TLDR power fantasy would go under fantasy not competition power fantasys are inherently uncompetitive)

I think expression can definitely be done however i think expression is more tied to a sense of meaning then of customisation its a jesture of resistance against a large and uncareing world that would never notice you otherwise a way to say hi im here and im human

This one is tricky but its definitely a thing i would say its more the mystery book way of going about things its sticking it through till the end to see how it all pans out its that triumphant i know everything feeling you get when a good plot comes together

I think i would call abnegation more a book that can relax you that cosy book that you can snuggle up and read when times are tough and just let your worries fade away

This could just be me but I would never expect to really love a book that was just a short and fast read i think it needs something more then just lengh and fluf. Not saying those are bad and im also not saying all books need to be works of art either but i wouldent pick up a book just to read it and be done. I dont know what im trying to say here just that a fun fast read dosent feel like a reason in and of itself. Perhaps the relaxation of reading is what im trying to say i think this one is

Anyways the reason I wrote this was just because I think you have the right idea but the wrong catagories and because i find this an interesting topic not to be rambly or annoying.

 

This is great stuff! Keep them coming!

Yeah, I was basing the whole thing off the established "Aesthetics of Play" and I used a lot of the definitions based on how they defined it for games. For example, the video really defined 'Competition' as dominance (the desire to exert dominance over another player, which includes all fighting and PvP games), and 'Abnegation' as basically 'playing Bejeweled in unlimited mode, grinding for levels, or clicking away at Farmville' where players simply don't want to think or be too engaged with the game.

I didn't think all the categories would be transferable to LitRPG, since it's going cross-media, but I wanted some sort of framework to start with, and I used the games aesthetics because LitRPGs are inherently game-like, and I really want to get to the core of what the main concepts are that scratch the LitRPG itch for readers (that traditional scifi/fantasy don't).

I really like your point about Discover = world-building. That's a really good one. This also explains why some readers are happy with "mechanics without a story", as these Discovery-inclined readers might be more interested in the game world a book presents rather than the narrative. Readers with preference in Narrative, however, is going to be disappointed in these books but will rate more highly books that are set in a mediocre world but has a good story line.

I also agree with your point about Abnegation, and the more I think about it I think the key element here is "safe". Of course, if you're rereading a book, you already know what happens, and you can feel cozy and "safe", because you know your favorite character is not going to be killed off. But maybe Abnegation is not really the correct word here...

Some other ideas I have:
- One very clear feature of LitRPG is explicit rules, which makes it feel like watching sports. A long time ago I asked myself the question why people watch sports, and I thought part of it was that it simplifies the world: there are clear rules, there are clear goals, and there's a very clear direction. You know at all times how well someone is doing just by looking at the scores. It's something of a relief to find yourself in that world, away from the confusing complications of real life.
- Easy set-up. Because it's a game, things can just simply be "by design", and this simplifies all the a) having good explanations for magic b) having good explanations of how different kinds of magic interact c) having a sensible world where it all fits together. Traditional fantasy is usually mentally taxing for the readers, since you need to build the world from scratch and have it all make realistic sense. By putting it in a game, you are once removed from reality, and readers can also find suspending their disbelief easier. There are known 'game rules', 'XP systems', 'special abilities' which readers already understand from their experience from playing games, so there is no need to learn new information regarding those aspects.

 

Ah, just thought of another one from reading a different thread. I understand now! The base-building itch is probably the same kind of joy captured in The Swiss Family Robinson, the triumph of human spirit in building a safe place to love and call home in a hostile environment.

Sorry.. this is just turning to be a place to collect my thoughts and ponder...

 

I actually completely disagree with this no insult intended by this to writers but most of that is because most LitRPG authors are new and cant handle those aspects of writing as they are by far the hardest. Any author can add a god to there story and use that as plot puddy also in most LitRPGs the rules arent really that clear if an author can just give a character an ability he never knew existed to win a fight or something that shows a flaw in the explanation of the rules ref sandersons laws of magic.

As an addition a good book should be easy to read independent of genre of course at this point im talking far out of the range most authors can write but a really good book should either be incredibly challenging or incredibly easy think the oddesy or GOT vs narnia,huckleberry fin,(discworld?)

 

As someone who loves dungeon books which are similar I would say its more about growing a base of power as you slowly expand and learn about the world perhaps this is what your saying

Also no problem with you thinking out loud here