In philosophical terms, "agency" is the capacity for a person to make decisions and act according to those decisions. The ability to decide one's own actions entails a substantial degree of self-expression and so is quite a significant power to hold, both pragmatically and existentially.
In videogames, however, agency becomes a tricky thing. Virtual actions are the products of the agencies of multiple participants: the player who acts, the developer who enables actions, and in cases of story-based narrative, the player-character whose actions drive forward the plot. For instance, players often distinguish between things they did and things their character did. When these agencies line up in agreement, a game is poetry in motion.
Not so much when they collide, as occurs in the puzzle platformer Ico, a game haunted by the agency quandary. The illusion of choice granted the player only survives so long as the player wishes to act according to the developer's guidance, and when the player's desire on how to act strays from this guidance, the illusion shatters beneath an unveiled deterministic game design. With the player's actions largely being governed by the whims of the developer, player agency becomes something of a problem.
WARNING: This article contains light spoilers.

Although more commonly known as the spiritual predecessor to Shadow of the Colossus and the upcoming The Last Guardian, Ico is a game of some renown. The player takes the role of the title character Ico in his attempt to escape from a mysterious castle after being exiled and imprisoned there for the sin of growing horns. Before long, the young boy finds himself accompanied by the ethereal Yorda, an older girl subjected to the captivity of her mother, the Queen of the castle. The game is minimalistic in narrative style, meaning the sparse characterization is primarily drawn from nuance and inference.
Gameplay consists of two general operations: puzzle-platforming, wherein Ico traverses terrain and solves environmental puzzles in order to create a path for Yorda to get from A to B, and combat, which tasks the player with fending off specters as they seek to recapture Yorda for the Queen. Although the player can jump, climb, swim, swing, push crates, pick up objects, use levers, attack monsters, and so on, Yorda's abilities are limited to rudimentary movement and the opening of doorways. Since this latter function is otherwise unavailable to Ico, it is for this that the player must drag her around.
Despite being her primary function in the game, Yorda opens doorways through proximity alone, courtesy of some magical properties innate to her. This is par for the character -- Yorda's absence of will defines everything about her, from her incompetency at performing basic commands issued by the player to her inability to register the danger of the Queen's minions. Even when the time comes for Yorda to carry out her most useful (and only) duty, it is a passive ability that requires her to do absolutely nothing but smile and look pretty. Yorda is burdensome, vapid, and weak; she is the lobotomized archetype of the damsel in distress.

Sadly, Yorda determines a significant proportion of Ico. The gameplay mechanics are framed by Yorda's feebleness and Ico's need for her continued survival. Since a language barrier reduces communication to basics, their relationship largely consists of the dynamic described by these mechanics. A primary expression of this is Ico's method of directing her about the castle, either by hollering at the lass to grab her attention or by holding her hand and physically moving to the desired location. The former, however, tends to be rather time-consuming as Yorda often finds it difficult to concentrate on the matter at hand, while the latter feels more like Ico is hauling cargo by an elastic rope. Meanwhile, the unfolding narrative impinges on the player growing emotionally attached to Yorda on the basis of this physical interaction.
As evidenced by her vacuity of will and her incapability to act, Yorda is severely lacking in agency. If she is not being rescued by Ico, Yorda is waiting for him to make a path that suits her relative immobility. In contrast, our steadfast protagonist spends his time in willful activity, solving puzzles and battling monsters as the situation demands. While it is of course quite easy to imbue a character with agency by drawing a comparison with Yorda, Ico is nevertheless propelled by actions in his own right, to his own end. Ico wants to escape the castle and will do everything in his power to achieve this goal.
So too does the player, by virtue of wanting to play and advance in the game. Ico's agency here is compatible with the player's, making the filling of his shoes all the more comfortable. The gameplay functions of the player-character meet the expectations and desires of the player, engaging him or her with the game under a loose role-playing pretense. For the most part, this is made all the more facile in Ico through the minimalistic style -- the less reason we have to dislike a character, the more tolerable we tend to find that character and his/her actions.
Unfortunately, at several points in Ico, the agencies abruptly diverge. So long as the player-character is expected to cart around Yorda as a glorified key card, her company is a necessary burden for the sake of game progression. There comes a time, however, when freedom is at hand and her abilities are no longer needed, yet the player is obliged by the narrative to reunite with Yorda and sacrifice any newfound chance at liberty. Attempts by the player to treat Yorda's literal stumble at the last hurdle as destined-to-be (or in my case, as a chance to thank my lucky stars) is met with a resolute "Game Over" screen.

What develops is an odd entanglement of the agencies of player, developer, and player-character. The developer requires the player to instinctively want to prioritize Yorda over escaping the castle. The player-character of Ico wants to return to Yorda's side in much the same way, we are retroactively told. What the player wants, on the other hand, is very much conditional.
Whether or not the player wants to reunite with Yorda depends on how tolerable they find her character to be. In the possibility that the player finds her company to be a far greater burden than she is worth, as is quite the likelihood given Yorda's chronic uselessness, the player will act contrary to the developer's wishes and the narrative will hit a dead end. The subsequent "Game Over" screen is not one resulting from a lack of skill on the part of the player or from misfortune but of a denial of the player's agency.
But the player's agency is never anything but a false pretense, an illusion maintained by successful manipulation of the player on the part of the game's makers. The actions of a player, and therefore the fulfilled agency of a player, only exist so far as they are entertained and permitted fulfillment by the developer. Likewise, the agency of the developer is only realized by the actions of the player. This is a universal principle across all videogames whenever a developer creates a virtual world and invites a player to participate within it.
This mutually characterizing relationship between the player and the game's makers produces a phenomenal experience born from both party's collaborating agencies. The agency at play during the course of a game is neither solely the player's nor the developer's but rather the two combined. We always talk about our personal experiences with a game as if we authored them, and insofar as the developer enables us, we are indeed the authors. Be that as it may, authorship isn't authority. He who brings to life an act is no more automatically the highest authority on his action than the player is of his/her decision to take Yorda's hand.
Not that any of this invalidates the authenticity of a player's experiences. There are hundreds of thousands of videogame tales that are intimate to the player who pseudo-co-authored them, each tale reflexively offering its own story on what player agency entails. Sleep Is Death is one game in particular that relates to this phenomenon, as is the above Half-Life 2 mod The Stanley Parable. Ultimately, the game experience is a shared one, just as any agency exercised within a game is collaborative.
So long as the illusion of choice is maintained, the discomfort of a non-existent player agency can be whitewashed. In the case of Ico, the problem is not linearity but that the feedback insufficiently matches the player's natural inclinations. The solution as always is to successfully enrapture the player until they are blissfully unaware that their strings are being pulled.
| BBcode help | |
| [b]Bold text[/b] | Bold text |
| [i]Italic text[/i] |
Italic text |
| [url] |
http://www.dtoid.com |
| [url=http://www.dtoid.com/] |
Web link |
| [img] |
![]() |
|
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
|
Comment with FacebookClick connect and comment instantly! |
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds |
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
And Bruce never lies.
Even all prior installments of the MGS series are better about agency than MGS4.
I haven't wanted to punch a blogger in the face as hard since I read some movie twit continue to use the term "chewing the screen" repeatedly.
My sarcasm-laden point being: it's not your story. The game was created by a team with a storyline in mind. Your task is to complete objectives to further the story and see it to its conclusion.
Do you think anyone actually gives two-shits about rescuing Princess Peach or Zelda?
It would have also been nice if they decided to not pad out the game with the most shallow/frustrating/repetitive combat system ever outside of the survival horror genre. Alas, people are still going to call this art because they were too lazy to compose music, and instead replaced it with wind and bird sound effects. (I know I'm being overly harsh, but it's just rubber banding backlash from the fact that hardly anyone acknowledges the game's flaws)
I don't disagree but the article had a lot of unnecessary language making it a chore to read. But keep writing, can't let a little critique get in the way. : )
I'll agree that you got a little wordy at times, but it's an incredibly well written piece. Player agency in games is definitely a worthwhile topic when discussing game design. Thanks for the write-up!
http://www.destructoid.com/the-future-the-silent-protagonist-will-win-160347.phtml
I think Stephen spent more time wanting Yorda to be something more instead of asking himself why she was the way she was. I never saw Yorda as useless or weak, I just saw her as a victim and someone who truly needed protection. What was really heartwarming was the opposite happened - she ended up protecting ICo.
Its a shame people will force their ideas of what a character should be on the character while they play it and get frustrated when it doesn't conform.
Yorda is that vehicle - she gives Ico even more of a reason to want to escape the castle because she is utterly dependent on him and completely helpless outside of the function of opening those magic green doors. Yorda changes the entire tone of the game in the respect that it forces you into a situation of cooperation and survival and forges a bond between you the player and Yorda the NPC, just by something as simple as holding her hand and leading her out of the way of danger or catching her as she almost doesn't make a jump. For me, Yorda was the first video game damsel worth saving because she was there in the adventure with me. I never felt emotionally invested in saving Zelda or Peach - they were just the end goal of the game, I had more emotional investment in trying to leap over the flag pole in the first Super Mario than I did for either of them. Not so with Yorda. Is she the smartest AI companion? Not by a long shot. But I'd argue if she was super capable, if she could make the same jumps that Ico could, or even if she could fight, then Ico would lose something special about it because you'd be changing the dynamic between them.
Overall, I thought this was a good read highlighting some of the conceptual mechanics at play anytime we play games. Definitely something interesting to keep in mind, and probably goes a long way to explain why some games are liked and others are hated.
Now if you want to argue that Ico would be a better game if it offered the possibility of an ending where the main character just leaves without Yorda if given the opportunity, instead of just a Game Over screen, then maybe we could have a discussion. I'm all for choice, however binary, but if a developer doesn't want to let me be a dick at every opportunity, I'm not going to write an article complaining that a character in their hand-holding simulator isn't good for anything else besides holding hands.
And besides all that, Yorda's inability to act on her own isn't just a conceit on the game's part to justify the gameplay; she's been locked in a damn cage for her entire life! How is she expected to just get up and start pushing blocks with a strange kid in order to run away from the only other person she's ever known? It's obvious she doesn't know if she should be escaping, but she doesn't necessarily want to stay either. That whole time you were getting annoyed by her lethargy, she was figuring herself out. And that makes her final, arguably FIRST act at the end all the more powerful.
It also argues a truism. Good game design is when the designers lead their players down a path, without the player's realizing that. This is one of the first things I learned about game design. So in the end all you are saying is that you feel that the game is poorly designed because you didn't connect to Yorda on an emotional level and the game doesn't like that. Actually, now that I think about it:
"Attempts by the player to treat Yorda's literal stumble at the last hurdle as destined-to-be (or in my case, as a chance to thank my lucky stars) is met with a resolute "Game Over" screen."
Wouldn't escaping the castle without Yorda be the end of the game? The game is over when you escape. The reason the developers are killing you instead of just saying "The End" is probably because they wouldn't want players thinking that it was the actual ending and that there was a way to continue the story by doing the opposite of just abandoning her.
Anyways, my point is: you didn't like Yorda or the role she played, and so was angry when you couldn't drop the extra baggage and thus escape, forgetting that you actually playing the role of Ico, not yourself, and yes, are forced into doing things that you wouldn't normally do. Story is also subjective and reliant on taste, and just because you didn't like it doesn't mean its a bad story, it just didn't conform with your own personal palette and is not the fault of bad design or writing.
IMO it's a bit too preachy, and makes you seem over-analytical when it's not really too hard of a concept - which is why some of the audience feels lost. Like Silent said, it would have been nice to get some applications of good agency, like MGS4, etc.
I've never played Ico and the reason is because of how useless the Yorda character is. I know that is the developers intention, but it's not for me. I enjoyed reading this.
Now in regards to your article it seems to me at least that you are trying to impose a real life and conscious philosophical topic onto what is by and large a medium of entertainment that has become, in many instances, a way of telling a story through interactive means. In my opinion this is like trying to put the concept of "agency" into a book or movie. While videogames are an interactive medium and are capable of doing things that other forms of entertainment can't you can't assume that they provide less collision of agency then any other medium just because the player seems to have a choice in what they do. When it comes right down to it you are limited by the game you are playing, whether it is by mechanics, story, or any of the other components that make up a video game. Since your article was based around forced decisions in a story I'll stick with that.
For a long time now video games have become more and more of a way for developers to tell a story and create a universe while simultaneously giving the audience an enjoyable interactive experience that no other medium can give. A lot of games, I'll concede that this point doesn't hold up to all games but I don't think that that is relevant in this case anyway, especially Ico exist at least in part because the designers wanted to convey a story just like an author writes a book or a movie script, its the same idea. But you seem to think that because video games are interactive that they are different but they are not, in this regard. If a character in a book doesn't do what you want them to do do you automatically hate the book because it didn't turn out the way you wanted it to. You can sure and you can scream up and down about how the author was wrong and this is not how it should have happened but that's, not only useless, but can also be childish and an insult to the writer. For the record I'm not calling you childish just making a point. You didn't write the book so you have no say in how it goes, if you don't like it then tough forget about it and go find another book. The same can be said about video games, especially Ico, it just seems more pronounced because you are given some sense of control but in reality its the same. You're just following along on a story that you didn't write and if you don't like how it goes or you don't connect with the characters like the author intended then that's how it is. Say you didn't like the game, say that it wasn't your style, heck even say that it sucked if you want and move on to the next game or back to one you like, like MGS4 because I can't see any other reason for posting that pic with no explanation. But don't write a blog post claiming that the game is flawed because you didn't get attached to the story and characters like the writer intended, and DON'T make assumptions of other people's thoughts on a character because you didn't like them. I've played many games where I didn't agree with the actions forced on my character but I never thought I had the privilege of determining all of my characters actions either. You play a video game like Ico for the story not the ability to influence any event based off of your like or dislike of a character, if you don't like the story just say so but don't make it seem like it's the games fault.
Well written look at the subject of agency! Though I do disagree a bit. In sofar that I generally believe agency is so stacked in favor of player's deciding to "play along", there isn't much a developer can do to assure the feeling by design. While the developers could have instituted a proximity sickness, wherein the player is weakened somehow by being away from Yorda, I feel that would be a bit hamfisted. It would assure an agreement between play and narrative, yes. But I think allowing that to fly or fail by the "magic" between a player, their baggage and your game makes up for the possibility to fail in the potential it has to resonate.
Also, as a point of style, I love using images that don't get directly referenced, and encourage its use in blogs!
Aside from that she will attempt to play with birds which carries its own poetic layers as the game clearly uses them as a symbol of freedom and taunts the player at several points by having them fly freely while the player remains trapped in the castle. Even Yorda's initial introduction carries this motif as she is quite literally representative of a bird trapped in a cage.
When Yorda isnt being rescued she'll actually point things out to the player, serving as a rudimentary hint system if you really pay attention. Her "uselessness" is intended to represent the obvious language barrier between herself and Ico. If you whittle all the art away and play a game based purely on the mechanics then you completely miss the point. There's so much simplistic beauty in the gameplay of Ico by the way it's used to both challenge the player and tell an emotional story. Calling Yorda useless and criticizing the intended mechanic is missing the point entirely.
Like (2008) Prince of Persia’s ending, where they expect me to be so upset at Elika’s death that I’ll immediately turn around and undo everything we worked for in the game (not to mention stumble around for ten minutes trying to figure how they want me to undo it, as it is not made clear at all) and the whole thing just left me frustrated.
I think the next part of their craft developers really need to hone is, well, manipulating us, making us do what they want us to without us knowing it, either that, or give a semi-satisfying conclusion to any other routes we may take, even if it’s just a non-standard game over .
Take the scene you mentioned in Ico, instead of the cutscene where Yorda falls and the bridge splits and we’re supposed to instinctively jump back, what if the scene was just a few seconds longer, and it showed Ico looking longingly and the door then back and forth between it and Yorda, then we make the choice? It’s almost exactly the same scene with the same results but I bet that would slyly guide more people to jump back for her.
Also, people, the blog is about how Yorda's uselessness ruins agency in Ico, not that it makes the whole thing shit or that your favorite game isn’t art.
I think we all have our problems with various storytelling methods. For example, I've noted that I have a tendency to score games with a melodramatic bent under games with darker, more minimalist storylines, like SOTC. Different strokes, I guess. You are a fairly ostentatious writer, though. I'd work on adjective saturation.
I get what you're saying: Games aren't art because any time you get someone examining or deconstructing them as though they were art you also see them getting shouted down by moron calling them pretentious and claiming that games are too "lowbrow" to be worthy of such "big words" or some such nonsense.
In point of fact games ARE art, but as with anything, the worst thing about video games are their fans.
MGS4 was the greatest game to feature a guy drinking soda with Sisqo and a monkey in a diaper ever made.
I've found it to be an extremely effective way of making people feel insecure about their ideas, relegating them to nothing more than "the intellectual masturbations of an ostentatious twit with nothing of any real substance between their ears", or something like that... Only you only have to use one word ;D
I've found it to be an extremely effective way of making people feel insecure about their ideas, relegating them to nothing more than "the intellectual masturbations of an ostentatious twit with nothing of any real substance between their ears", or something like that... Only you only have to use one word ;D
I've found it to be an extremely effective way of making people feel insecure about their ideas, relegating them to nothing more than "the intellectual masturbations of an ostentatious twit with nothing of any real substance between their ears", or something like that... Only you only have to use one word ;D