How important is a games setting/story/immersion to you?

[Gunstar Green]

It really depends. If a game is gameplay driven, then I don't necessarily need a story. The type of games I generally play are arcadey and story is often a complete afterthought.

That said I don't always want to play those kind of games. I can put up with gameplay issues if the story is strong and the game is immersive. There are plenty of games that have sucked me into their world that aren't necessarily super fun as "games."

I always have a hard time expressing myself when this topic comes up because there are two different extremes from pure gameplay to pure story and both have their place with lots of stuff in between.

Ultimately I suppose if I find a game fun because of the strength of one element that makes up for the weakness of other elements it doesn't matter. I used to make the argument that it's better to be a game with great gameplay and poor or no story than a game with a great story and bad or no gameplay but I don't really feel that way anymore. It just depends on what you want and what you expect to get out of the game.

Though I'm sure you could dig up plenty of examples of games with gameplay so bad that their story can't save them and stories and settings so awful that you don't want to play them even if they're mechanically solid.

[J T]

I can enjoy a game that is all gameplay and no story (Tetris) and I can enjoy a game that is all story and no gameplay (Gone Home, Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs, Katawa Shoujo, Zork, Dear Esther). If I had to choose between gameplay and story, I would pick gameplay over story, because if I really wanted story I would just read a book.

I get most excited when the two blend perfectly. By this, I'm usually less interested in plot, and more interested in how a feeling is captured by the gameplay. I really loved the indie game Thomas Was Alone because in that game, you play a series of rectangles of different colors and sizes, but there is a narrator telling you about each rectangle's personality and the personality quirks are represented in the gameplay. For example, one rectangle supposedly has a very energetic personality, and his gameplay is faster and bouncier than the other rectangles. The gameplay and story are fully interwoven in a beautiful way. Even something as simple as a having slippery sliding controls in an ice level is also a good example of the setting and the gameplay coalescing.

I think since I grew up in the 80s when games really didn't have much story, I have a lot of respect for gameplay. I grew up with Colecovision and Atari first, and was really excited when I first played games like Final Fantasy and Ninja Gaiden on the NES and discovered that story could be an important part of the game, but I've always liked a game that feels good to play. I'm actually happier playing games like PacMan or Asteroids than I am when playing a lot of modern story driven games with little gameplay. Nevertheless, I want to be able to play things like A Wolf Among Us or To the Moon that are almost entirely about telling a great story.

[MrPopo]

Zork has gameplay.

[alienjesus]

I tend to enjoy games the most when they are at either of the extreme ends of the story driven vs abstract mechanics spectrum.

My favourite games are either the story driven RPG, Visual Novel, Adventure and Strategy games - where the story often is a compelling mechanic in continuing the game, and thus I find the story and setting to be really significant, or else the far more abstract puzzle, shmup and rhythm games where the game mechanics are the driving force and story is usually an afterthought or a nice bonus. In the latter case, compelling mechanics are more than enough to make up for a lacking story. Platformers fall into the latter camp for me too.

My least favourite games are actually the more balanced ones, where story and mechanics are much more even if focus - I find that most modern action, FPS and open world games fall into this category.


Basically, a story is important to me if that is the central focus of the game. If the mechanics are the central focus, then the story doesn't bother me. If it's somewhere in the middle, then it better be damn good at both to keep me interested, and I just find that most of these games aren't compelling for me.

[Ack]

An interesting enough setting and design may make up for bad game design or poor stories.

Take a game I started playing yesterday: Outlaws. It's an FPS from 1997, so it is a product of late 90s FPS design, where the controls and design are still being standardized. This makes playing it an occasionally rough prospect, particularly when dealing with the vertical axis and aiming. It also features a storyline expressed mostly through videos between each level. This story is generic fodder for a Western. A land baron uses his criminals to try and force a former lawman off his land by murdering his wife and kidnapping his daughter while he's away. The lawman decides to find his daughter and get revenge, so he kills his way to the top. It's simple really.

What sets Outlaws apart from being a potentially mediocre prospect is the way the game uses its visual and auditory design to appeal. First, all story sequences are animated, so it feels like you are watching a cartoon that is at times very violent. It then extends this animated quality to the gameplay through its visuals, particularly your weapons. The HUD also plays into the old west setting by having the appearance of an 1800s cash register to display critical information. Add in the excellent soundtrack and beefy sound effects which make guns sound powerful as well as some of the entertaining physics effects, and you end up with a game that feels at times like you are playing a cartoon spaghetti western, one where firing a shotgun into a man at point blank will launch him up and over the room and where you have to knock more rounds into your Winchester before emptying it into the room full of bandits you're about to empty out.

This use of game design to enhance the experience is what takes the game to a whole new level for me, and it's why I've been having a blast playing through it.

[isiolia]

Are these three aspects of video games something that generally get's ignore by most people? Maybe it's something everyone is aware of, but people just don't find them very important? And, of course, how important are these to you personally?

Really depends on the style of game to me. Like JT mentioned, there are certainly genres out there that basically don't need any of these elements. Puzzle games like he mentioned, or I'd say things like driving/racing games where a story mode might add to it, but isn't a must have.

That said, I'd say most games I make a point to play these days do rely on character/setting/story a good bit, and in turn, it's fairly important to me that I find those elements appealing on some level. For a lot of games, that's what's going to grab my interest, and keep it, regardless of the actual gameplay. Or turn me off from the title or series. I mean, solid or outstanding gameplay plus a throwaway story is one thing, but if I actively dislike the characters or something, that'll probably be the determining factor in whether or not I bother to play it.

Immersion can be a different thing, at least to me. I think of it more when a game kind of gets under my skin, where even when I'm not playing it I'm thinking about it, researching it, strategizing... you know, becoming immersed in it. What winds up driving that varies, and seems much harder to reliably repeat. So while I might certainly hope for a game that hooks me that well, I'm also fine with a game I can just run through, have fun, and put away.

[ExedExes]

Immersion means a lot for me, only because gaming to me is an escape from the real world at times. That's one of the factors I love a good FPS, classic or modern. We live our lives in the first person, and the same perspective is in these games. For me it's not about not just going through the levels to clear them fast, I like to take time to appreciate the design elements, see if I can find anything hidden or difficult to get to, looking at the walls and the artwork or the advertisements, for me just getting lost in it is a big thing I enjoy. Story is something that I can enjoy, but many FPS aren't really known for their stories with the exceptions of the games that came out in the past 15-20 years. That's what other games can provide for me.

But that doesn't mean I don't enjoy a game with really simplistic gameplay or some fast action, that's why I also like all types of arcade games, because sometimes we need that "twitchiness" in our gaming experience!

[Sano]

I like to be immersed in the story personally.

[J T]

After reading what isiolia and a few other describe as immersion, I wonder if we all operate on the same definition. From my perspective, immersion is a psychological phenomenon almost like being hypnotized. That's not to say that you are in a trance necessarily, but you suddenly switch psychological states to feeling like you are in the game world, and you kind of forget about the real world.

I think it is different from being engrossed in the activity of a game, but really that you kind of buy into the game world and feel that you are really there. For me, immersion comes and goes during gameplay. As an example, when I was crawling around in jails of Amnesia: The Dark Descent, I was no longer aware of the edges of my screen and beyond. I was in those dark creepy jails and the creatures were after me. All the fear and creepiness felt tangible and present (unless I had to go to the bathroom or something). Obviously, I can tell the difference between fantasy and reality, but those moments of suspension of disbelief for the entire game world experience are what define immersion to me.