Octavianus
Banned
Most video game stories are horrid so I mostly agree.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Video Games Are Better Without Stories
- Thread starter RedlineRonin
- Start date
EmCeeGramr
Member
The entire "why does this have to be a game, it could just be another form of storytelling, the neat technical aspects of the game engine aren't storytelling," part comes off like saying, "Why did Welles make Citizen Kane a movie instead of a stage production, all of the fancy cinematography is just technical wizardry, not artistic expression."
Why have interactive elements in a game when you could have an animated film.
Why show off your fancy props and actors with a play when you could have a tapestry.
Why show off your pens and pencils in a graphic novel when you could have orally transmitted stories around the hearth.
Why have interactive elements in a game when you could have an animated film.
Why show off your fancy props and actors with a play when you could have a tapestry.
Why show off your pens and pencils in a graphic novel when you could have orally transmitted stories around the hearth.
Kent
Member
This is absolutely correct.
You can always have a great game without a great story. You (literally) cannot have a great game if it's devoid of great gameplay.
But at no point has it needed to be a one-or-the-other situation - the nature of games as a medium have never necessitated that, and outright-amazing experiential things can be done when you make the story told primarily through the gameplay of a game.
The article is bad, like really really bad.
In the context of this article, video games do not exist beyond 3D environments.
Stories told in most Ultima games? they weren't in 3D so clearly they do not count as they are from a land before time itself!
The title is bad but at least you can debate it, the content? Dear god!
In the context of this article, video games do not exist beyond 3D environments.
Stories told in most Ultima games? they weren't in 3D so clearly they do not count as they are from a land before time itself!
The title is bad but at least you can debate it, the content? Dear god!
RedlineRonin
Member
Thanks for sharing this.
I don't usually get around to Waypoint stuff that isn't in audio form. A good write-up (usually the case with Austin's stuff)
Jawbreaker
Member
Define "great gameplay." Would you say Life Is Strange has great gameplay? Until Dawn? Journey? These are all titles I greatly enjoy. I even love Deadly Premonition, and that game has really subpar ... well, everything — aside from characters, atmosphere, and its general quirkiness.
TheSpecialOne
Banned
Yes because what you want is what everyone else wants....
benicillin
Banned
I'm not so sure I agree with that definitive statement. Lots of games that have bad gameplay and great stories (like Deadly Premonition) are beloved.
Northeastmonk
Gold Member
It's like he never played a JRPG or even a BioWare game in his entire life.
What about Sierra's and Lucasart games? I'm not sure this modern day journalist person did any research.
I bet he blames Call of Duty and GTA on mass murders too.
just saying
What about Sierra's and Lucasart games? I'm not sure this modern day journalist person did any research.
I bet he blames Call of Duty and GTA on mass murders too.
just sayingUnemployedVillain
Member
I think there's a bit too much focus put on writing as the sole reason this isn't currently the case. People gravitate too much towards preconceived narratives, which are good, but ultimately are bit sized bits of other mediums. Whenever you're watching a cutscene that is a small movie-like approach to narrative. Whenever you're reading a log entry or, say the memories in Lost Odyssey, those are book-like approaches to narrative.
I'm not saying those have no place, because some things just have to be told to the gamer in some way, but I think the bigger problem is that games don't blend those with interactivity and emergent gameplay better. If you're playing as a character, it's not enough to just be them as they go through a rollercoaster of pre planned events. There should be stories that you, as a player, as the character, create yourself. MGS is a series notorious for doing this badly, despite having a compelling story. It is gameplay interspersed with incredibly long cutscenes. Most of its narration is done in a movie-like fashion.
BOTW is a game that does this well (at least when it comes to its worldbuilding). You'll maybe see a distinctive landmark or hear multiple character refer to rumors or things they've seen. The game never provides markers to where these are so you're just keeping them in the back of your mind. So and so hear a rumor about this region. So and so in the region saw a landmark that looked cool. Said landmark ends up leading to some discovery. It's a very organic and natural way of building the story of an area.
Now, I'm not sure how well this would work for all stories, or more complex narratives in non-open world games, but I think I vastly prefer tons of short cutscenes to a (relative) few bunch of really long cutscenes
OrbitalBeard
Member
I wouldn't consider visual novels or graphic adventures to have great gameplay, yet many of them are still great games.
Red Blaster
Member
ian is comically dense for a full professor + college chair at georgia tech
Not true at all. Stories can provide context, stories can motivate, stories can create meaning. Just throwing a character into a world and say "do stuff" isn't necessarily any more imaginative than giving a focused story. Majora's Mask wouldn't be what it is if not for the 3-day story giving context & motivation, it also provides a very imaginative way of structuring gameplay, the world & all the interactions.
AudioEppa
Member
No and it never will be.
I get enough enjoyment from gameplay that don't require story. It's called multiplayer.
Overall stories are the most important part of video games. I don't care if some people believe it's better in other medium. Storytelling has been the saving factor for my continue interest in video games since playing MGS on PS1.
The more it has evolved over the years, the better.
I get enough enjoyment from gameplay that don't require story. It's called multiplayer.
Overall stories are the most important part of video games. I don't care if some people believe it's better in other medium. Storytelling has been the saving factor for my continue interest in video games since playing MGS on PS1.
The more it has evolved over the years, the better.
In his review of Hellgate: London, Shamus Young touched upon how important stories are to the immersion factor of video games:
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1701
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1701
No way.....some of my favorite games are heavily story-based. BioShock, Deus Ex, KOTOR, The Last Of Us, Red Dead Redemption etc.
Some of the most well received and critically acclaimed games are story-based. Often, this wasn't just because of their gameplay, it was because of the story as well.
Some of the most well received and critically acclaimed games are story-based. Often, this wasn't just because of their gameplay, it was because of the story as well.
LordKasual
Banned
/thread
Messofanego
Banned
Ah, the hot take article that had videogame twitter in a tizzy.
Surprisingly from Ian Bogost, he says nothing new that many other intellectuals and GAFers say on a daily basis. The only difference here is he picked a recent narrative game to mention. Ian's argument in this piece is that storytelling is mutually exclusive from an effective novel use of a 3D engine, and I disagree. He even says the writing in the game is good and makes good use of the interactivity of games for the storytelling compared to other "walking simulators". So, not a very strong argument for why games shouldn't bother with telling stories. What more you get out of this article is that Ian Bogost has a certain preference for what games should be, and that's about it.
I thought Edith Finch was an affecting story, I connected with it emotionally and that's what I got out of it. It couldn't work as well and be as surprising as a movie or other mediums because of the perspective and gameplay shifts.
Surprisingly from Ian Bogost, he says nothing new that many other intellectuals and GAFers say on a daily basis. The only difference here is he picked a recent narrative game to mention. Ian's argument in this piece is that storytelling is mutually exclusive from an effective novel use of a 3D engine, and I disagree. He even says the writing in the game is good and makes good use of the interactivity of games for the storytelling compared to other "walking simulators". So, not a very strong argument for why games shouldn't bother with telling stories. What more you get out of this article is that Ian Bogost has a certain preference for what games should be, and that's about it.
I thought Edith Finch was an affecting story, I connected with it emotionally and that's what I got out of it. It couldn't work as well and be as surprising as a movie or other mediums because of the perspective and gameplay shifts.
Some Nobody
Junior Member
Now where are all the "The story doesn't matter"/"I skip all the stories" people to support this guy, because when I first came here I was pretty taken aback at how many people sounded a lot like this.
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
The day games quit having narratives is the day I drop this hobby.
I'm honestly a bit baffled at the thought of spending this much time trying to reach a grand rule about "story in games".
Seeing all entertainment media as being different areas of the same spectrum, with video games encompassing the basic capabilities of most everything that came before them, it should be obvious that different parts of different experiences will require different amounts of player agency to be engaging. What could possibly be disagreeable about that?
The intersection of mechanics and aesthetics (which include basic narrative beats) is where games have always been most engaging, and Bogost's examples of this are weak af.
Seeing all entertainment media as being different areas of the same spectrum, with video games encompassing the basic capabilities of most everything that came before them, it should be obvious that different parts of different experiences will require different amounts of player agency to be engaging. What could possibly be disagreeable about that?
The intersection of mechanics and aesthetics (which include basic narrative beats) is where games have always been most engaging, and Bogost's examples of this are weak af.
Human Trashcan
Banned
Persona 5 is a good argument in Bogost's favor.
But nah his take sucks and is tired and old and would not even merit consideration were it not coming from an Important Figure like Bogost. A real head-scratcher. It's descriptivist and wrong.
there is a group of people who just focus mechanics and a group of people who just focus on stories and a third group who wants both.
I, personally fall into the story group. I will play a visual novel and love it if it is good.Movie games are alright with me. I don;t even remember feeling anyway about Witcher combat and I couldn't even begin to get into Super Meat Boy..N+ etc..
I like my games to be an experience, not an activity I guess. If I know a game has a shite story...I will skip it. YMMV and I could be way off base, but rarely if ever does gameplay turn me on or off to a game....almost always story does.
I, personally fall into the story group. I will play a visual novel and love it if it is good.Movie games are alright with me. I don;t even remember feeling anyway about Witcher combat and I couldn't even begin to get into Super Meat Boy..N+ etc..
I like my games to be an experience, not an activity I guess. If I know a game has a shite story...I will skip it. YMMV and I could be way off base, but rarely if ever does gameplay turn me on or off to a game....almost always story does.
RedlineRonin
Member
The other thing that just occurred to me, is I think games have a bigger hill to climb in terms of believability.
In a book, I can picture characters having dialogue and there are no animation glitches, there's no lip-synch timing issues. It's almost like books get a pass because there's no chance of my imagination causing issues that break immersion.
To a bit lesser extent, this applies to movies also. Professional actors are great at acting. They do multiple takes to get it right.
Games have a much harder time with this believability (if the recent ME:A stuff is any proof) and I think is part of why games made by the likes of ND get lots of praise. They are the least immersion breaking when it comes to the technical aspects.
In a book, I can picture characters having dialogue and there are no animation glitches, there's no lip-synch timing issues. It's almost like books get a pass because there's no chance of my imagination causing issues that break immersion.
To a bit lesser extent, this applies to movies also. Professional actors are great at acting. They do multiple takes to get it right.
Games have a much harder time with this believability (if the recent ME:A stuff is any proof) and I think is part of why games made by the likes of ND get lots of praise. They are the least immersion breaking when it comes to the technical aspects.
BlastProcessing
Member
The bolded is one thing that can set games apart. It's not the only thing by a long shot.
Art can create a huge range of emotional responses in a viewer. From sadness to rage to impotence to joy to excitement to stress to exultation. One thing games are uniquely qualified to engender in an audience is a sense of responsibility. Games can connect people to an event in a direct way that other art struggles to match. It allows for the creating of stories that can become something far greater than the sum of their parts.
There is a reason that telling someone else about a game's story is often like recounting a dream. People don't seem to understand the impact that the thing had on you because it relies on such a specific, intimate connection. With out that other people's dreams sound like boring gibberish. This is why game stories often get a bad rap. The core of what makes them valuable is often impossible to convey.
Dangansona
Member
edit: wrong thread
I am baffled by those who think story is the most important part of a game. No it isn't. You can have the best story in the world, but if your game is shitty? Well too bad. I won't be playing it. I'll just watch the story on a let's play channel.
This article is shitty of course since TLOU would be worse without a story, but alot of games don't need stories.
This article is shitty of course since TLOU would be worse without a story, but alot of games don't need stories.
I'd hate to have experienced Monkey Island that way, personally.
Saw this yesterday in the games twitter storm. I really hope some editor somewhere came up with the title instead. I don't think it really matches with the ideas in the article. Whoever said the article is too narrow is on point too. Seems like the kind of piece that pops out when you try to expand a pretty small part of specific games over an entire medium.
Responses here seem to not be discussing some of those points though. There is a slight validity to a couple ideas in there that get lost in the overall message. I feel like there's a lack of awareness in there about different narrative structures than what he's focusing on.
Responses here seem to not be discussing some of those points though. There is a slight validity to a couple ideas in there that get lost in the overall message. I feel like there's a lack of awareness in there about different narrative structures than what he's focusing on.
More_Badass
Member
Pretty much what I was going to say
I mean as soon as he generalized an entire medium by saying everything else "tells them better", his argument was flawed
Why does this story need to be told as a video game? You could ask the same for any work in any medium. Why film, why literature, why song or theater or art?
It's telling that he diminishes storytelling in games as mere expression of 3-D engines and other technical elements, which would be like diminishing a book as just letters and characters in certain arrangements.
Indeed.
Hell i care about campaigns more than multiplayer in COD, and generally don't bother with games that don't provide a single player experience.
It feels like the author thinks all games should be meaningless multiplayer esque games as a service affairs with meaningless stats and competition as the only reason for their existence.
People have different opinions of games and what they mean to the individual and what they get out of games. Its not a hard concept.
whatever6352
Member
While I enjoy great gameplay a game with bad story but great gameplay will be dropped at a moments notice, but a game with bad gameplay, but an amazing story will have me hooked to the very end.
Lord of Ostia
Member
That's your opinion and your taste. Not all games need to fit what you like.
I don't say this often, but I think this article is garbage. Anytime any author tries to make an argument about how games should be, he or she usually just comes off as "I don't like this genre/setup, so everybody should start making and enjoying what I like". Despite the writing efforts of this author in particular, in the end his argument boils down to specific elements of storytelling that don't work well to him, which hardly applies to the masses that do enjoy these gaming experiences.
This quote in partciular I just find insulting to the many developers pushing progression in storytelling within the medium: "To use games to tell stories is a fine goal, I suppose, but its also an unambitious one." If anything, this author himself argues against ambition, because he attempts to narrowly define what specific mediums should achieve, instead of having creative minds push their boundaries.
This quote in partciular I just find insulting to the many developers pushing progression in storytelling within the medium: "To use games to tell stories is a fine goal, I suppose, but its also an unambitious one." If anything, this author himself argues against ambition, because he attempts to narrowly define what specific mediums should achieve, instead of having creative minds push their boundaries.
Stories don't have to be writing and plot and whatever, it should be noted. Interactive environments are an integral part of walking simulators, and serve to really enhance the storytelling ability of games that no other medium currently has.
Imagine if someone adapted Everyone's Gone to the Rapture as a movie. Just a camera panning around a room full of props and then on to the next one. The only movie I can think of off the top of my head that successfully does this is Five Easy Pieces, and that was just the opening credits sequence. We have games completely comprised of "enter room, examine objects, learn plot"
Imagine if someone adapted Everyone's Gone to the Rapture as a movie. Just a camera panning around a room full of props and then on to the next one. The only movie I can think of off the top of my head that successfully does this is Five Easy Pieces, and that was just the opening credits sequence. We have games completely comprised of "enter room, examine objects, learn plot"
JeTmAn81
Member
Most games are better without stories, IMO, but there are some games that deliver a really well-crafted interactive story that couldn't be done any other way. But, story is definitely the thing that games do worst. Novels and movies will always destroy games in the story department.
Not saying it should, but stories should never come first in a game. I am playing a game. It should work and be fun by itself. Stories enchance the gameplay, but if your gameplay sucks then why should i trudge through your game just for the story when i can go on Youtube?
He is on point.
Neil is 100% correct.