Support NeoGAF

[HellofaMouse]

There are multiple aspects of gameplay tho. Its not more important than story as in it doesnt need to be super polished, complex/tactical etc. But it does need to be bug free and smooth (no backtracking, good checkpoints, reasonable difficulty curve etc) to not ruin a game so much so that you dont even care about the story anymore.

So all in all id stay gameplay and story (presentstion rather) are equally important

 

[Steez]

I love a good story in games( Planescape I'm looking at you), but it never trumps gameplay for me. I can't play a game if it doesn't have good gameplay.

Torment is the prime example for amazing story coupled with bad gameplay.

 

[travisbickle]

I think most gamers are full of bullshit and I expect a bunch of derisive comments about No Man’s Sky and it’s lack of “lore”, background story or narrative after it dumps you in the middle of the universe in a spaceship. In NMS your choice to attack a ship is based on your own will. You’re not going to be told who are the good guys and who are bad.

 

[Acquiescence]

Just kind of ignoring the "story" part in the title there, it's a frequent mantra spoken by people that 'Gameplay > Everything Else' no matter what, and that's a philosophy towards gaming that I don't 100% agree with. While it can't be denied that it's the interactive element that differentiates video gaming from the other entertainment mediums and makes it unique, I can think of a good few examples of games that I adore that perhaps didn't place emphasis on the gameplay side of things, or just flat out don't play well. Titles like Silent Hill 2, Fear Effect, Grim Fandango, ICO, Journey and Danganronpa off the top of my head are games that are merely serviceable in terms of how they play, or just downright shoddy, but they excel through other means, whether it's due to the story, the characters, the writing, the art direction, the graphics, the soundtrack, the atmosphere or, usually in the case of a true classic, all of those separate facets listed coalescing into something that's truly unforgettable.

Journey for instance, if you break that game down to its core gameplay foundation, has you pushing up on the left analogue stick for most of the time while occasionally pressing the circle button to chirp at your co-op buddy in what is essentially a rudimentary mechanic that serves no role in helping you progress. It's certainly no great shakes in the gameplay department, and yet it was awarded NeoGAF's game of the year 2012. Grim Fandango had horrible tank controls and a cumbersome inventory system, yet it was a marvel thematically and is generally regarded as one of the all-time great classic adventures. ICO has a braindead combat system designed to mimic the feeling of playing as a vulnerable boy with zero fighting experience. It doesn't feel satisfying to fend of those dark spirits, but it's a style of play that draws you into the character's plight through a feeling of disempowerment. What I'm getting at is, sometimes, and it certainly doesn't happen regularly, but sometimes a game is so involving thematically or emotionally, and so captivating on a visual/aural level, that it can transcend our conventional expectations of what a video game is supposed to deliver. Journey is considered a masterpiece not because of how tight its controls are, but because it made a lot of people cry. As schmaltzy as that sounds, it's true.

Don't get me wrong, I like traditional 'gamey' games, but above all I like diversity. I think that a video game industry that places emphasis on different things is a good one, and if a studio wants to emphasise the story or characters or ambiance over gameplay, then let it.

 

[Hyrule Warrior]

I tend to fall on the same side as the OP. I enjoy good gameplay, but if they don't even attempt, or they fuck up the story entirely, it can completely ruin the experience for me. I'll feel like "well what the hell did I play this for?" Games can be fun, but without a good story to drive the experience, I honestly just feel like I'm wasting my time. That's why I don't really play multiplayer games much anymore, because it just seems like I'm not accomplishing anything.

I also think that games with a good story, but bad gameplay can still be great experiences. Just look at Deadly Premonition...that's a game I would have never given a chance based on gameplay footage, and screenshots....but once I saw how crazy and good the storytelling was, and how good the characters were written, I just ended up fucking loving that game. It's a janky as fuck game, but I still enjoy it because of the story and the charm it has.

On a different note though, I used to think the Mass Effect series had everything for me...I liked the gameplay in ME1 and 2, and I enjoyed the story and characterization in those characters a lot. However Mass Effect 3 came along...and you could say that the shooter gameplay was improved over ME2...and even I could admit the multiplayer was a good gameplay experience...but because they fucked up the storytelling soooo bad in ME3, I just can't say I like it. It ruins the experience for me completely, and I find myself now hating a series that I once told a friend of mine before ME3 came out "It's one of my favorite series on this generation of consoles"...but because of shitty story writing in ME3, I honestly hate it.

 

[kiguel182]

Mass Effect 1 has clunky shooting and just really bland gameplay but the story carried the whole thing and it's pretty much what I remember about it.

Limiting video game stories because there are tons of bad ones makes no sense.

 

[FluxWaveZ]

I think most gamers are full of bullshit and I expect a bunch of derisive comments about No Man’s Sky and it’s lack of “lore”, background story or narrative after it dumps you in the middle of the universe in a spaceship. In NMS your choice to attack a ship is based on your own will. You’re not going to be told who are the good guys and who are bad.

Like all those derisive comments towards Minecraft, Terraria, Spelunky, etc. because of their lack of story?

 

[Drop]

Well, I don't know if I can really say I feel bad for that person, but I obviously do think there is value in playing a large variety of games to truly determine one's tastes, instead of being ignorant of what might be out there that they might truly enjoy, but haven't gotten to play yet. I personally don't "play games for story", but I enjoy video games that depend on them. I also enjoy video games that depend on their gameplay, or those that balance both.

People can enjoy story driven games without being dependent on them, while still playing games that are solely driven by their gameplay.

All you just said is so true, I don't understand why people put arbitrary barriers to their experiences, the point is not to play a game because it has good story or good gameplay, everyone should play a game if they enjoy it, regardless of what it focus on.

it's fine to make distinction for the sake of finding games you're more likely to like, especially when you have limited time to play, but i feel that excluding shuch a big and arbitrary category like "story driven", or "gameplay focused", is doing yourself a disservice.

 

[Skii]

A game with a great story but bad gameplay is a bad game.

A game with a bad story but great gameplay is a good game.

A game with a great story and great gameplay is a great game.

That's how I see it anyway (obviously there are some exceptions but this generally works for me).

 

[SolVanderlyn]

gameplay > story

If I wanted a story, I'd rather read a book or watch a movie.

I see this argument all the time, but I can't help but strongly disagree with it. Games are a form of interactive entertainment, but that's no reason for them to automatically get a pass when it comes to telling a story, creating a certain atmosphere, or building on the lore of the world. For me, the appeal of interactive entertainment comes from being immersed in a new world. A huge part of Metroid Prime's appeal is in its ambient storytelling, sense of isolation, music, and art design, all of which come together to build an atmospheric experience. Does that mean the gameplay is irrelevant? No, of course not. Skyrim does something similar and its gameplay is pretty bad, which makes it a significantly worse game. But one ingredient does not a recipe make.

Just because something is called a "game" does not automatically preclude it from needing more than just gameplay. Of course, if I pop in a game like Gradius or Contra, chances are I don't really care about the story or atmosphere. There are different kinds of games like there are different kinds of books or movies. But to make the blanket statement that gameplay should always be the number one priority, at the expense of other aspects of a game if need be, is fundamentally flawed. Many kinds of games benefit from a mix of gameplay, storytelling, and all of the other elements I mentioned. Good games are defined by crafting a good experience, and the gameplay is often only one part of that experience.

Is it the one part that sets it apart from movies and books? Yeah, of course. But that doesn't automatically give the industry a pass to overlook the other aspects of making a game.

P.S. I love Skyrim, I just recognize that it's a fundamentally flawed game.

 

[cireza]

I don't care much about the story. If I want a good story, I'd rather read a book or watch a movie.

Edit : someone just said the exact same thing

 

[Mar Nosso]

I see most people in this thread think gameplay is more important than story. However I diagree with such and have always had the same opinion as the OP.

The general sentiment favouring gameplay seem to stem from the fact that most gamers see videogaming as a gimmicky past-time still. Whereas I've always regarded it as an interactive story-telling medium and an art form.

Personally I am unable to tolerate a game with good gameplay, but a bad story. Vanquish comes to mind, for example. There is no drive to keep playing if the lore is inconsistent, diminishing or uninteresting. I can kill dozens of bad guys in dozens other games. Even when the gameplay is satisfying, in the end I would only be doing it for the sake of doing it, with no greater purpose, with nothing of value to extract and/or learn.

Games that focus solely on gameplay and simply circumvent a story or don't need one, that's fine. They're not pretending to be anything they are not and thus they don't insult my intelligence or waste my time. And I can also appreciate them for what they are.

But to me, yes, a good story/plot/character development/lore/scenario/world is mandatory. And I hope more and more gamers come to see the need for it. I'd like for this medium to achieve more than the thrilling peaks of scores conquering.

 

[KungFucius]

I agree. Story is more important than devs understand, because a shitty story for a story driven AAA game is a huge let down. It's not one or the other, good games need both if they have both.

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

I don't really like that this whole story / gameplay thing is set up as a dichotomy. The point of every game ever made is to draw you into an experience. Narrative and "gameplay" are both just some of the elements game designers use to immerse the player in their little worlds, just like music and graphics.

Like look at Wonderful 101 for an example (since I just came here after playing that). It's definitely a game that lives and dies on its refined mechanics, but no one who has played and enjoyed it could say that a huge part of its appeal comes from its presentation too (and "story" is really just a single part of that presentation. Same for even "story-heavy" games like Gone Home or whatever.)

 

[Shin Kojima]

Uhm N64 came with Super Mario 64 if it had more story than SMB I certainly don't recall so.

Zelda did, and it was a little disappointing. Not shit, but disappointing if you were a fan of the previous games at the time.

 

[Refreshment.01]

How did my quoting destroy the context? The only parts I didn't quote were the example you gave and the entirely seperate bolded point at the end.

You left out a very important part of the paragraph:

Games were the "ginmick" is the story tend to age more poorly than the ones where the gameplay was the priority. Not to mention that with games, what once was considered "good" story telling might even feel a bit silly with the passage of time.

You truncated to:
Games were the "ginmick" is the story tend to age more poorly than the ones where the gameplay was the priority.

Implying that im telling: "good stories age". When i never said that. More over, the highlighted part that you left out directly relates to and agrees with what you said here:

That is because our standards have become higher, video game storytelling has much improved over the years.

Took my time to explain this in detail while typing in a crappy tablet, so please consider that, and let's move pass this phase of the discussion.

 

[Hyrule Warrior]

I agree. Story is more important than devs understand, because a shitty story for a story driven AAA game is a huge let down. It's not one or the other, good games need both if they have both.

Oh god yes...I'm really starting to give up on AAA games as a place to even find a good story anymore, because every fucking time that these big publishers smell dollars out of a franchise, they refuse to let it die, and that also leads to a terrible story imo. Like Assassin's Creed...another series I thought had great potential, but because they had to annualize it and put out a game every year, story telling doesn't matter to them at all anymore. I feel like one of the things a good story needs is to have some closure, and when everything has to be a franchise that gets milked til it's dry, that's never a possibility anymore to get a well told story.

 

[TheVoidDragon]

I really don't like the "If you want a good story go read a book/watch a movie" idea. The majority of games the purpose is that they are an interactive story, that's pretty much the whole point of them. In games like Civilization the focus is on the gameplay and that's fine, but with something like Half Life the point of it is to tell a story that you can interact with at the same time. If the story was unimportant in a game, it wouldn't have any sort of story at all.

If the gameplay is good and there's a bad story, i'd consider that a bad game. Both of them need to be good in order to make a good game, although for me even if the gameplay is bad, if it has an alright story i'll keep playing to find out what happens.

 

[Schreckstoff]

I don't really like that this whole story / gameplay thing is set up as a dichotomy. The point of every game ever made is to draw you into an experience. Narrative and "gameplay" are both just some of the elements game designers use to immerse the player in their little worlds, just like music and graphics.

Like look at Wonderful 101 for an example (since I just came here after playing that). It's definitely a game that lives and dies on its refined mechanics, but no one who has played and enjoyed it could say that a huge part of its appeal comes from its presentation too (and "story" is really just a single part of that presentation. Same for even "story-heavy" games like Gone Home or whatever.)

It's not really.

It's more like a "if you had to pick one" situation.

gameplay > story, story > gameplay statements are just ordering them according to importance.

 

[toastyToast]

Depends. In general, I'm willing to make a concession depending on how strong either aspects are. A great story with adequate gameplay or great gameplay with an adequate story. Bad of either can suck it.

 

[lazygecko]

Blizzard's mantra has always been gameplay first. You can see how this manifests when they make major gameplay and game design decisions in their lore-rich and historied game worlds. If they face some dilemma where they want to implement or change something in the game, yet this contradicts what the lore of the world already dictates, then they are going to do it anyway instead of compromising fun for the sake of story. A good story in a game context will be able to adapt to these decisions in a way that still feels believable.

 

[Bricky]

Implying that im telling: "good stories age". When i never said that. More over, the highlighted part that you left out directly relates to and agrees with what you said here:

Took my time to explain this in detail while typing in a crappy tablet, so please consider that, and let's move pass this phase of the discussion.

Ah, sorry, that makes sense. I thought you made two different points, which is why I quoted and replied to both separately. I just didn't understand you meant for it to be a continuation of your earlier statement. 'Not to mention' implies a new argument.

 

[Mr. RHC]

#TeamGameplayMasterRace take this into consideration:

Some probably think the Mario series is the prime example of gameplay > story. However, the line "But Our Princess Is In Another Castle" is probably on of the most recognizable game narrative scenes ever.

So even some of the most gamy games are in fact driven by a strong narrative, not necessarily a complex one.

I don't really like that this whole story / gameplay thing is set up as a dichotomy. The point of every game ever made is to draw you into an experience. Narrative and "gameplay" are both just some of the elements game designers use to immerse the player in their little worlds, just like music and graphics.

This.
I think the problem is that story and gameplay are ambivalent terms and the lines are increasingly blurring.

 

[Shin Kojima]

The majority of games the purpose is that they are an interactive story, that's pretty much the whole point of them.

I'm sad that people think this way now.

 

[PaulloDEC]

I don't care much about the story. If I want a good story, I'd rather read a book or watch a movie.

Would you still be saying this if you had easy access to games with stories as good as those in books or films?

The medium is still just getting started. I feel like we should be embracing its potential, not acting as if it has none.

 

[FluxWaveZ]

gameplay > story, story > gameplay statements are just ordering them according to importance.

Not for all of those saying that any given game could completely live without the other. Those saying that in this very thread would probably then propose there is no purpose in The Wonderful 101's premise or setting.

 

[HK-47]

Torment is the prime example for amazing story coupled with bad gameplay.

Torment's battle system is merely mediocre not bad and the real game takes place in the dialogue as to shape your Nameless One, or at least your incarnation.

 

[KKRT00]

Mass Effect 1 has clunky shooting and just really bland gameplay but the story carried the whole thing and it's pretty much what I remember about it.

Disagree. Mass Effect 1 had great gameplay. A lot of variety in setting up Your team, ability to setup team mates in tactical mode, a lot of synergies between skills, very satisfying physics of biotics.
Also i enjoyed Mako a lot.

 

[ta155]

A game can play as fantastically as it wants but I'm definitely going to gravitate towards it more if it has a great story to go along with it, or at least characters that I care about.

I wasn't always this way, but these days I do want a good story to go along with my games (unless I'm playing a sports game or something, obviously).

 

[Seraphis Cain]

I always put it like this:

A good story is certainly welcome, and I'll appreciate a game that much more if it has one. But a bad or even terrible story will never dissuade me from buying a game. Bad gameplay, however, will.

 

[SolVanderlyn]

Would you still be saying this if you had easy access to games with stories as good as those in books or films?

The medium is still just getting started. I feel like we should be embracing its potential, not acting as if it has none.

Well said.

 

[HK-47]

Disagree. Mass Effect 1 had great gameplay. A lot of variety in setting up Your team, ability to setup team mates in tactical mode, a lot of synergies between skills, very satisfying physics of biotics.
Also i enjoyed Mako a lot.

The gunplay, loot and Mako are all heavily flawed. They sorta gave up on the first two in the sequels but the gun play and power usage got better each game. I'd love to have 3's combat system in 1.

 

[FantasticMrFoxdie]

Why not all three.


I enjoy games with gameplay > story, story > gameplay, and gameplay ~ story

 

[Shredderi]

I seek different things from different games. I love a decent videogame story. I wouldn't say it's more important than gameplay to me, but when I think about my favourite games they are all feature a pretty decent story to them.

 

[Seanspeed]

I mean, I have played them, they're just really boring (to me); hence, I've only played them for a bit.

What sort of games do you like?

No offense but I think this is even wrong on a subjective basis.

I can't believe people really have this tunnel vision that games as a form of entertainment can not provide what books and movies etc. do

No video game has ever had a story as captivating or impactful as I can find in a good book or movie. That's not tunnel vision. That's just me applying a standard across all mediums instead of lowering my standards when it comes to stories in video games.

If you feel different then....ok, but its definitely a subjective thing.

And part of my frustration is that I don't think this necessarily has to be the case. I don't buy into this notion that video games are inherently less capable of providing these captivating narratives, I just think they don't tend to have very good plot writers.

Well, I don't know if I can really say I feel bad for that person, but I obviously do think there is value in playing a large variety of games to truly determine one's tastes, instead of being ignorant of what might be out there that they might truly enjoy, but haven't gotten to play yet. I personally don't "play games for story", but I enjoy video games that depend on them. I also enjoy video games that depend on their gameplay, or those that balance both.

People can enjoy story driven games without being dependent on them, while still playing games that are solely driven by their gameplay.

People can do whatever they want. I don't have a problem with anybody who plays games mainly for story. But I will feel bad for them, just as I'd feel bad for a vegetarian who goes to eat at a BBQ joint. Yea, they may still find something to enjoy, but it sure as hell aint the best place for them to find what they want.

 

[IAmRandom31]

It can go either way honestly. Sometimes the story has been so horrible in games I get disengaged and just throw it in the pile and move onto the next one. I have however dealt with bad gameplay designs or concepts just because the story was engaging and I wanted to experience the rest of it.

Star Ocean 4 for example had great gameplay. Solid battle system and all that. The story was just atrocious though and got me completely disengaged so I made it only about halfway through. Heck at one point I turned on the japanese voice actors just to try and get some sense of professionalism from the voice actors. American ones were probably the worst I had ever heard.

But yeh it can go either way. If I had to choose though I'd go with gameplay since some games have no story really to speak of but I'll still play it to death

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

Personally I am unable to tolerate a game with good gameplay, but a bad story. Vanquish comes to mind, for example. There is no drive to keep playing if the lore is inconsistent, diminishing or uninteresting. I can kill dozens of bad guys in dozens other games. Even when the gameplay is satisfying, in the end I would only be doing it for the sake of doing it, with no greater purpose, with nothing of value to extract and/or learn.

I think this is a really short-sighted view that heavily devalues what video games are capable of. What about learning and engaging with Vanquish's combat system is less purposeful than playing a game with a more developed and emphasized narrative?

I don't care much about the story. If I want a good story, I'd rather read a book or watch a movie.

Edit : someone just said the exact same thing

Try like half the people in this thread, and countless people who jump into this discussion every time it comes up on the internet.

It's not really.

It's more like a "if you had to pick one" situation.

gameplay > story, story > gameplay statements are just ordering them according to importance.

What I'm saying is that you can't really separate them. It's like saying "what's more important, music or graphics?" You can't properly judge a game's soundtrack or its art assets individually; what's important is how they serve the greater whole.

 

[petran79]

Yep.
It seems like the younger generations of gamers who grew up without that and started around the N64 generation don't really understand what used to draw us to video games. I want to feel like I'M going on an adventure, not watch some douche go on an adventure while occasionally letting me control him.
I don't think a good story in games is without merit entirely, but it should never be a priority over engaging gameplay.

Same goes for consoles other than NES. Sega and Atari relied heavily on arcade games.
besides for a good story you just need to leave your imagination open

 

[Lux R7]

The thing is, to me, that if u want a certain kind of fun, u need gameplay.
If u, instead, are looking for that kind of fun that a good movie or book can give u, so a good story/poor gameplay videogame it's ok.

Personally, i play videogames for the fun of the gameplay.

 

[FluxWaveZ]

People can do whatever they want. I don't have a problem with anybody who plays games mainly for story. But I will feel bad for them, just as I'd feel bad for a vegetarian who goes to eat at a BBQ joint. Yea, they may still find something to enjoy, but it sure as hell aint the best place for them to find what they want.

And I can similarly feel just as bad for people who have this kind of tunnel vision.

 

[toastyToast]

You have to admit gameplay > story falls apart when you're talking about RPGs. An RPG can have alright gameplay and a fantastic story to round out at a fantastic game. If we're talking action games ala Devil May Cry, I don't give a flying fuck about a marginally more coherent story at the expense of a mechanical complexity. Not to say I liked DmCs story more than previous games. An all encompassing stance ranging from Phoenix Wright to Street Fighter seems silly.

 

[TheVoidDragon]

I'm sad that people think this way now.

Why? That is the point of a lot of games, although not all of them. That doesn't mean the story in a lot of them is good, but games that do have a story are trying to tell it in a way you can interact and have fun with. Any specific backstory, characters, locations, events etc that gets included in a game is pointless if a story isn't important, but it's all there to come together with the gameplay and make a good experience.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

A lot of people had fun with Deadly Premonition.

True, but I think a lot of that was due to it being a novel one-off. If every game was as janky as that no-one would be happy. I mean, despite DP being a pretty major cult hit, look how unsuccessful D4 has been by comparison.

 

[Gbraga]

Why not all three.


I enjoy games with gameplay > story, story > gameplay, and gameplay ~ story

Yeah, pretty much.

You don't have to choose a side, you can love both Nier and Street Fighter.

I do.

 

[lazygecko]

And part of my frustration is that I don't think this necessarily has to be the case. I don't buy into this notion that video games are inherently less capable of providing these captivating narratives, I just think they don't tend to have very good plot writers.

I think this problem is mostly rooted in the incredibly narrow view the majority have in what constitutes a story in a video game. The standard definition seems to be this passive, pre-defined narrative written in a traditional book/film style which more often than not struggles to seamlessly weave itself together with the game in question. It's no wonder then that people are constantly going to compare game stories to said mediums and find it inherently lackluster.

Of course it's always going to be regarded as worse unless you actually embrace what sets games apart in the first place, rather than feel at odds with it (which is what a lot of these "traditional story" games do what with the ludonarrative dissonance and all) what with interactivity, random variables, social elements (ie multiplayer or roleplaying) and create an engrossing experience out of that.

 

[Jathaine]

You have to admit gameplay > story falls apart when you're talking about RPGs.

No, you really don't.
Once I started to get into the "Tales of" series of JRPGs, most other JRPGs just fell off the map for me.

I don't know a lick of Japanese but I played all the way through this entire game because of the gameplay.



Its more dependent on the person than the genre.

 

[WetTreeLeaf]

What sort of games do you like?

I like plenty of games, some with almost no story. If you're asking me for my favorite games tho off the top of my head I can say Red Dead Redemption, Skyrim, Witcher 2, Baldur's Gate 2, Dynasty Warriors 4. My original post on this thread was that recently I have been playing less and less (strictly) gameplay games.

I've just never been of fan of Mario/Zelda games, maybe cause I only grew up playing the PS1/PS2. But just for you I'm going to play Super Mario Sunshine right now.

 

[xzeldax3]

I've always loved stories and games began filling the whole that my dislike for books left in me (school killed my love for reading).

I need some structure in a game to motivate me through it. I love story modes in games, even though it may be unconventional (like in a racing or music game).

Games where you are just trying to beat your high score usually don't keep my interest. Even the flimsiest score is good enough to keep me motivated.

But some of my favorite games are story gravy, like Persona 4. I see many people warning newcomers that is hours of "mashing X" until you get to "the game." I love those hours at the beginning. Soaking up every detail about the characters and the world; it's my favorite thing about Persona 3/4.

 

[eso76]

Yeah me too.
I also disagree with gameplay > graphics
And everything else.
And the opposite of everything else.

People like gaming for different reasons, and they are all legit to me.


Besides videogames aren't even required to be "games" anymore.

 

[Shin Kojima]

Why? That is the point of a lot of games, although not all of them. That doesn't mean the story in a lot of them is good, but games that do have a story are trying to tell it in a way you can interact and have fun with. Any specific backstory, characters, locations, events etc that gets included in a game is pointless if a story isn't important, but it's all there to come together with the gameplay and make a good experience.

I should have elaborated.
It IS the point of a lot of games now and that's what saddens me.
Not once did I visit the arcades in my life with the purpose of having one of the games try to tell me a story. Petran79 nailed it with that Bubble Bobble picture. That's all we needed.