Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Honestly making stories for video-games are is almost always a waste of time.

I do not believe that I can find a good way to agree with this except to agree to disagree.

im going to go out on a limb here and say that one of the best characters in gameplay history was captain price from the modern warfare series. now wait before you all come down on me. im not a fanboy, i just think that he was really well fleshed out and genuinely believable.
as female leads go. samus aran is beyond the best, she is one of the coolest characters in video gaming. female none leads has got to go to moria brown from fallout 3, you either love her or hate her and i loved her.

Melissia wrote:

Honestly making stories for video-games are is almost always a waste of time.

I do not believe that I can find a good way to agree with this except to agree to disagree.

I halfway agree with both of you:

Story is important, but it needs to talk a sideline to gameplay and graphics.

Order of Imporance:
Gameplay




Graphics
Story

Braid is a fantastic example of mixing the story, graphics, and game-play. These aspects of a game need to be harmonized, not prioritized.

Nurglitch wrote:Braid is a fantastic example of mixing the story, graphics, and game-play. These aspects of a game need to be harmonized, not prioritized.

True, but if they HAD to be prioritized, that up there is my priority list.

So basically if wheels were square, you'd stack them like that?

Nurglitch wrote:So basically if wheels were square, you'd stack them like that?

Sure.

I mean, Bioshock is a prime example of having all three, graphics, gameplay, and story meshed together, and I would buy another game like it in a heartbeat, but how many games are of Bioshock Quality? Seriously, If there are any out there, I haven't really heard of them (For Xbox, any way).

Would you kindly send me $100 in the mail?

camboyaz wrote:NOTE: All good video games main character doesn't talk much. This makes YOU feel like your the character. The supporting Characters are the most importent/most complex.

I don't understand this point of view. If I was the main character I would be doing more interacting than nodding my head or looking surprised. The communication from your end is completely insufficient in most RPGs. it always annoyed me when I was playing some RPG and an NPC would say "so you don't talk much huh?" when the designer could have made the character say something the he or she would understandably say given the circumstances. It would also be nice to be addressed as something other than "you" or "hero" or "lieutenant".

I would rather have the game supply a personality (like in brutal legend) then play a character that has none. Until a game comes along that lets you choose a demeanor to begin with and makes your character follow it in dialog I would rather have my personality supplied.

Problem is all these games with succesful stories don't have anything really special about their story. You could get the same message as Bioshock from reading Ayn Rand, and get it better (though why would you want to read Ayn Rand....) Braid was self-indulgent, pseudo-intellectual, hipster/indie crap, and honestly when is indie stuff not self indulgent, pseudo-intellectual crap?

Of course they are not bad games, but people should realize that these are just ok stories, not amazing ones like so many people seem to think. There is a priority for enhancing gameplay first, and I have no problem when a game successfully does both. I just have to be aware that even games that synergize their gameplay and story only have decent stories in the end. What annoys me is when people compare video games to things with actual literary merit, and dare I say....art?

Also Trine>>>>>Braid; Trine 2 F*** YEAH!!!

Having a good story doesn't need to be about reading some message in it.

I find that most stories worth bothering with have some sort of message.

Now, with that said, indie/hipster messages I can do without.

Melissia wrote:Having a good story doesn't need to be about reading some message in it.

Most games don't have a message, and so are mostly mediocre at best. A good video game story might be engaging, have interesting characters but you havent changed the way you think about the world at all in the end. Something that can do that would have a good story, and I suppose could be considred art. It's more entertainment than anything else, so I'd say that games are great for entertainment, and have entertaining stories, but not meaningful ones.

Merging this thread:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/327728.page

http://gigaom.com/2010/02/17/average-social-gamer-is-a-43-year-old-woman/

Wow. This one cites sources and everything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girl_gamer

wikipedia wrote:According to a survey done in 2004 by the Entertainment Software Association, 25 percent of console players and 39 percent of PC game players are women. Also, 40 percent of online game players are women; however, these numbers also include casual games.

That nugget is sourced as well. If you're going to factor Farmville into these numbers, they mean exactly nothing in the context of "Girl Gamers" and FPS or other more male oriented genres.

Manchu wrote:Merging this thread:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/327728.page

Uh... what? The threads are different topics entirely...

Alright, I'm re-opening and moving to OT.

asimo77 wrote:Problem is all these games with succesful stories don't have anything really special about their story. You could get the same message as Bioshock from reading Ayn Rand, and get it better (though why would you want to read Ayn Rand....) Braid was self-indulgent, pseudo-intellectual, hipster/indie crap, and honestly when is indie stuff not self indulgent, pseudo-intellectual crap?

Of course they are not bad games, but people should realize that these are just ok stories, not amazing ones like so many people seem to think. There is a priority for enhancing gameplay first, and I have no problem when a game successfully does both. I just have to be aware that even games that synergize their gameplay and story only have decent stories in the end. What annoys me is when people compare video games to things with actual literary merit, and dare I say....art?

QTF once again.

Video games have not yet reached the point where I'd feel comfortable calling them art, and I would think anyone claiming a video games story can stand side by side with the likes of those found in books hasn't read enough books. Video games will probably get there someday, but not yet. Some genre's however probably never will. No one ever played an FPS so the developers could preach to them the evils of dictatorships and how we should stick by our friends when the going gets rough. People actually play them to shoot pseudo-bullets at their friends.

You know I'm trying to think of an example to disagree with you, LordofHats, but I really can't.

LordofHats wrote:

asimo77 wrote:Problem is all these games with succesful stories don't have anything really special about their story. You could get the same message as Bioshock from reading Ayn Rand, and get it better (though why would you want to read Ayn Rand....) Braid was self-indulgent, pseudo-intellectual, hipster/indie crap, and honestly when is indie stuff not self indulgent, pseudo-intellectual crap?

Of course they are not bad games, but people should realize that these are just ok stories, not amazing ones like so many people seem to think. There is a priority for enhancing gameplay first, and I have no problem when a game successfully does both. I just have to be aware that even games that synergize their gameplay and story only have decent stories in the end. What annoys me is when people compare video games to things with actual literary merit, and dare I say....art?

QTF once again.

Video games have not yet reached the point where I'd feel comfortable calling them art, and I would think anyone claiming a video games story can stand side by side with the likes of those found in books hasn't read enough books. Video games will probably get there someday, but not yet. Some genre's however probably never will. No one ever played an FPS so the developers could preach to them the evils of dictatorships and how we should stick by our friends when the going gets rough. People actually play them to shoot pseudo-bullets at their friends.

Video games have not gotten there for sure, and I hope they don't strive to be. Video games should not be innovating or pushing the envelope in terms of storytelling. The innovation should be happening in gameplay since thats where the medium excels. Leave innovation of narratives/stories to books and movies, since that's their job. In other words devs need to make strides in the realm of gameplay before they try to make strides in our plots.

What video games should do is entertain their players.

Any other requirements violates the purpose of a game.

Not all gamers, of course, are entertained in the same way, which is exactly why we have different kinds of games even within a genre (For example, Metro 2033 is extremely different from Team Fortress 2).

LordofHats wrote:QTF once again.

Video games have not yet reached the point where I'd feel comfortable calling them art, and I would think anyone claiming a video games story can stand side by side with the likes of those found in books hasn't read enough books. Video games will probably get there someday, but not yet. Some genre's however probably never will. No one ever played an FPS so the developers could preach to them the evils of dictatorships and how we should stick by our friends when the going gets rough. People actually play them to shoot pseudo-bullets at their friends.

I don't know about FPS games, but I do know that in RTS games (according to people from both Relic and Gas Powered Games, though I admit to being too lazy to search through relicnews and gpg's forum to find the exact quote) single player and single player skirmish are both more popular than multiplayer.

Books don't do or seek to do the same thing as movies, or paintings, or sculpture, or other media. Video games are no different in this regard.

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:

camboyaz wrote:NOTE: All good video games main character doesn't talk much. This makes YOU feel like your the character. The supporting Characters are the most importent/most complex.

I don't understand this point of view. If I was the main character I would be doing more interacting than nodding my head or looking surprised. The communication from your end is completely insufficient in most RPGs. it always annoyed me when I was playing some RPG and an NPC would say "so you don't talk much huh?" when the designer could have made the character say something the he or she would understandably say given the circumstances. It would also be nice to be addressed as something other than "you" or "hero" or "lieutenant".

I would rather have the game supply a personality (like in brutal legend) then play a character that has none. Until a game comes along that lets you choose a demeanor to begin with and makes your character follow it in dialog I would rather have my personality supplied.

Because they want people to relate to the character and when the character already has it's own personality etc, it's just not possible to feel like I am the character, I feel like i'm playing the character. Kind of confusing but that's just from my perspective.

Melissia wrote:I don't know about FPS games, but I do know that in RTS games (according to people from both Relic and Gas Powered Games, though I admit to being too lazy to search through relicnews and gpg's forum to find the exact quote) single player and single player skirmish are both more popular than multiplayer.

It'll depend on the genre and the way the market grows (the standard FPS for example will never reach it imo because there are very explicit reasons why people play FPS games). There are a number of ways for video games to become their own art form separate from others through the interaction of the player with the game world, but right now the technology to do that adequately doesn't exist, though some games like Indigo Prophecy have made forays into playing with this concept. Interaction is what makes games stand apart from film and literature, and that's where it'll find it's way of being artistic, but we're probably going to have to wait awhile to reach that point.

Quite a few FPS games, such as Metro 2033, Bioshock, Quake 4, and Half Life 2 to name a few of the ones that come to my mind, have story to draw people in. It works.

I mean if I wanted an FPS game that's only multiplayer I'd just play TF2, which is about as polished, balanced, and with as much variety as you could expect from an FPS multiplayer-only game. I got Metro 2033 because its premise and story looked nice. I bought Bioshock for the same reason. Quake 4 I bought because I like the Quake series, but its story was nicely written, tying in its various gameplay elements and environments with few flaws. And Half-Life... I absolutely adore the series' setting and story, from the initial game of the first to the most recent episode of the second.

A game can't stand on its gameplay elements alone anymore.

Melissia wrote:A game can't stand on its gameplay elements alone anymore.

Depends on the game, honestly.

L4D, for instance, has a story, but honestly, who is playing it for the story? Almost everyone plays that solely for the gameplay.

Most people play Devil May Cry for two reasons: The airtight gameplay, and Dante. Most people don't care about the story.

Resident Evil 5 is a very popular game, mostly due to it's gameplay. It sure isn't because of it's story, at least.

However, those few games with story really have catipulted above their competition, even if their stories are "sub-par" (no comment) compared to other mediums.

Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Gears of War, Fallout. Most people know the names at LEAST, even if they have never played them.

I would however, like everyone to define "Story" in this thread. It's just something I want to see, I'll explain afterward.

I play L4D because of the story and setting. It's gameplay is nice, but it's the setting that makes the game.

Slarg232 wrote:I would however, like everyone to define "Story" in this thread. It's just something I want to see, I'll explain afterward.

To put it very generally, I think that "story" is why I should care why the character is doing what they are doing.

Melissia wrote:A game can't stand on its gameplay elements alone anymore.

Clearly you've never played World of Goo.

Melissia wrote:Quite a few FPS games, such as Metro 2033, Bioshock, Quake 4, and Half Life 2 to name a few of the ones that come to my mind, have story to draw people in. It works.

Metro had a good idea for a good story that flushed out into a horrible story. Lets just get that out of the way now. Never played quake. Bioshock and HL2 had good stories by game standards, but by the standards of every story that has ever been told their on par with B movies. And the story isn't what made Bioshock and Half Life 2 good. They were supplements to a strong gameplay aspect, that along with those decent "at least they don't suck" stories made the games stronger. Gordon Freeman is also a stellar example of a silent protagonist who does his job well for translating the player into the game world.

I said there were exceptions, but the exceptions don't just have story, they have gameplay, which makes or breaks games. They probably could have had bad stories, and still would have done fairly well because their gameplay was strong. Plenty of games stand only on gameplay. Unreal has never had good story. Neither have most action games or most FPS games.

What makes and breaks games is gameplay. The story is just a backdrop for the setting to provide an excuse to put your friend on the other team (with Rcon) and pwn him/her. Many great games have great stories by game standards, but throw in so much as a good movie, and sudden Halo Reach's story line seems rather shallow and uninspired, which it is, but by a game standards Halo had a good story and one that people can enjoy greatly if they forget how shallow it is and focus on the gameplay with the story as a backdrop.

Well Samus Aran is a blonde, and is awesome. She has put an entire world to the flame and she has tight under armor and as bad ass as Master Chief. And she was basically screwed up by the game that recently came out, yeah she wins the awesome award.
I love female badass characters in video games. Especially from gears of war.

Lord of Hats has gotten it down. It's nice when someone out there has the same ideas as me but is more eloquent

Also Samus is just like Master Chief! Boring as hell.