Are fun games doomed to always have "dumb" stories?

[J T]

Interesting article:

http://www.magicalwasteland.com/mw/2012 ... ystem.html

Central Point:
If you make a game with combat that involves lots of fighting/killing, your can't write your characters out of that.

[Erik_Twice]

The article is pretty...unfocused so excuse me if I go down other roads. I think he shouldn't focus on "most modern videogames".


I think the problem with this is that you don't need to tell a "good story". That's missing the point, you don't write a story for it's own sake, you write it because it shows something you find interesting. I know I'm repeating myself but I really think people should focus on what you want to show than in tools like "a good story" or "deep characters". OutRun and Castlevania don't have those and their themes come up better for it. Or you can just have a good game without any themes, as proven by Chess.

I think this obsession with stories is what's causing those "dumb" stories he complains about. He is looking at the problem in the inverse, thinking shooting stuff causes dumb stuff. In many ways I feel he is looking for an explanation and explanations kill jokes.

I also really, really think this man should play some boardgames.

[Menegrothx]

I think this obsession with stories is what's causing those "dumb" stories he complains about. He is looking at the problem in the inverse, thinking shooting stuff causes dumb stuff. In many ways I feel he is looking for an explanation and explanations kill jokes.

This. I dont see why most games even need a storyline, and in many cases games with good gameplay dont even have one. What's wrong with games being games? It's pretty obivous that most of the times when game developers try to use video games as a story telling method, the gameplay has to suffer. Nothing wrong with games with cutscenes etc but the obsession with storylines is stupid. Who cares about the storyline of Angry Birds or Tetris? I am infuriated when all I want to do is blow shit up and the stupid wanna-be-Hollywood movie FPS game wont let me.

Max Payne's nightmare sequences are a nice example of how story telling in video games can feel like a chore and make the gameplay awful.

[sabrage]

Who cares about... Angry Birds?

I loved Max Payne's dream sequences (and storytelling, for that matter.) Go figure.

[Menegrothx]

I loved Max Payne's dream sequences (and storytelling, for that matter.) Go figure.

I think they had a nice athmosphere, but many people complain about the part where you have to navigate in the dark. I think its a perfect example of sacrificing gameplay for narrative. Well, atleast you were still playing the game. In cutscenes you are forced to stop playing the game and just start watching it like a movie.

[sabrage]

I figured that was the part you were referring to. It was disorienting, creepy and frustrating, in a way that reflected Payne's emotions at the time very accurately. It might not have been fun, but it served its purpose well.

[BoneSnapDeez]

I think someone said it best in another thread (maybe it was Flake, I'm too lazy to look it up): video games are simply a terrible medium for storytelling.

Any game with a "good" story gets bogged down with cutscenes, quick time events, and other nonsense. Likewise, games that feature consistent action-oriented gameplay frequently lack a story altogether.

[Ivo]

I think someone said it best in another thread (maybe it was Flake, I'm too lazy to look it up): video games are simply a terrible medium for storytelling.

I really disagree. They are at most a worse medium for storytelling when you use conventions from another established storytelling medium.

They don't NEED to be bad at it, they just usually have been. I personally think that even when they use the conventions from another medium they can on occasions surpass them and there are examples of that, and that if designers use the things that games can (and that other mediums can't) then they can be the ONLY medium for certain types of storytelling.

Ivo.

[MrPopo]

I think this is one area that JRPGs tend to do well. They still use the "ravaging monsters" as the standard enemy, which removes a lot of the cognitive dissonance between having a character who is supposed to be compassionate killing so many things.

[Ivo]

I think this is one area that JRPGs tend to do well. They still use the "ravaging monsters" as the standard enemy, which removes a lot of the cognitive dissonance between having a character who is supposed to be compassionate killing so many things.

Even those games tend to have a lot of "intelligent" enemies (even if they are "non-humans" etc.).

JT's summary is adequate: You can't write your characters out of killing lots. But killing lots doesn't need to make your characters unlikeable or even unrealistic (movies about war situations, for example), which is what can happen in JRPGs. They do it better if they avoid grinding. I would say Panzer Dragoon Saga was particularly good in those aspects for example.

For me Tactical RPGs tend to perform better: they usually have more careful stories, the total number of kills isn't huge, and often when one of your guys dies he really dies.

But in the end indeed you can't write your characters out of the gameplay and sometimes that gets in the way - JT, wasn't it you that complained recently about Link going into houses and breaking people's pots with a sword? Grand example there. I read an interview with a famous developer (I think it was Tim Schafer and about Psychonauts) about this type of thing where he even asked the interviewer "Doesn't that bother you?". But it doesn't bother most gamers I think. I mean in many games I wouldn't mind but, despite it having become a genre convention I think that Zelda games could and should do without some of those aspects. I don't even think they need rupees, they could just streamline the best parts of the experience more instead of having you mow the lawn for rupees

Ivo.