// NARRATIVE DESIGN

How TV and Film Vocabulary Translates to Game Narrative Design

Primary question: What do a screenwriter's existing terms actually correspond to in game narrative design?

By · Source essay published 2023-09-06 · Reference version updated 2026-08-09

Quick definition

A screenwriter moving into games isn't starting a new discipline from zero — most of the vocabulary already exists under a different name. Protagonists, supporting casts, subplots, and season structure all have direct game-design equivalents. Learning the translation is faster than learning the craft twice.

In one line: The terms changed. The underlying job — making an audience care what happens next — didn't.

The translation table

TV / film termGame equivalentWhat carries over
ProtagonistPlayer-controlled avatarBoth need a clear role and enough personality to project onto, not necessarily a full backstory.
Supporting castNPCsThey exist to give quests, comic relief, and opposition — the same job a supporting cast does, just triggered by proximity instead of a scene cut.
EpisodeLevelBoth are a standalone unit with its own objective that still feeds a larger arc.
Character arc / achievementLeveling upBoth reward accomplishing something specific and mark visible growth.
SubplotSide questBoth deepen the world and secondary characters without derailing the main line.
World-buildingSystem designBoth create the rules and pressures a story or a match actually runs on.
Skill development (a character improving)Skill mastery (a player improving)Both are built on repeatable mechanics that reward practice.

Where the translation gets interesting, not just convenient

A few of these correspondences aren't just naming coincidences — they point at real shared craft problems:

  • Adaptation and fan expectation. A game built on existing IP has to navigate the same tension a TV adaptation does — honor what the audience already loves while finding room to do something new. The stakes are identical; only the interface changes.
  • Player choice and viewer influence. Branching games and interactive television (a rudimentary early example ran on a Season 2 finale, driven by an alternate-reality-game audience) are solving the same problem from opposite directions: how much of the outcome does the audience actually get to touch?
  • Collaboration at scale. Both mediums require writers, directors or designers, performers, and a production team to serve one narrative without any single contributor's ego winning. The org chart looks different; the discipline required is the same.

Where the translation breaks down

Push the metaphor too far and it fails in one specific place: a TV episode assumes the audience watches every beat in the order the writer built. A game level has to work even when the player skips a quest giver, misses an environmental clue, or reaches an area in an order nobody planned for. The vocabulary transfers; the assumption that the audience experiences things in a fixed sequence does not — which is exactly the decision the next stage in this path exists to help make.

Try translating your own project

Take a current TV or film project and run it through the table above. If a subplot won't survive being reframed as an optional side quest, or a supporting character can't function as an NPC without a monologue, that's often a sign the material was leaning on cutscene-style exposition rather than something the format's own tools already handle.

Source note

This maintained reference page develops ideas first published in “Ludo-Narrative Synergy” in Scribbler’s Toolbox on September 6, 2023. The original essay remains part of the editorial archive; this version is structured as a durable craft reference.

Related pages

About the author

is a screenwriter, showrunner, and narrative designer whose work spans film, television, games, and transmedia storytelling. Scribbler’s Toolbox collects practical frameworks developed from professional story development and production.