Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
I know it's blasphemy around here, but I actually do for the most part.
-
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.
I disagree with "gameplay > story"
- Thread starter enigmatic_alex44
- Start date
Threads like this just illustrate that it's never a black and white thing. Personally all the games you mentioned I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole because to me, that sounds unappealing as hell. I will never be interested in a game like Gone Home and that's fine, because it's not for me.
I fall into the gameplay camp and that's fine too. There are plenty of 'gamey' games for me to play. I'm sure there are people here that wouldn't touch Star Ocean 4 or Tales of Graces with a 10 foot pole and I can understand why. Still doesn't take away from the cool game mechanics for me even if the story is almost universally considered awful.
karasu
Member
Most game stories are so ridiculous that they barely approach the credibility of Saturday morning cartoons. It's like half of it is the same chosen one schtick that Mortal Kombat was selling in 1992. And the presentation of the stories is often full of strange visual glitches during cut scenes and tasteless voice acting that makes it a real struggle to take anything they're saying seriously. I don't believe this medium is meant for storytelling. At least not the cinematic form that so many are stuck on mimicking.
Pankratous
Member
Story is by far the most important aspect of a video game, followed by gameplay.
One thing to bear in mind is that the audience for gaming has expanded significantly since then I'm almost certain that a there are a good number of people who wouldn't be playing games during that era who do now.
The only two things a game needs is to be "fun" which is super subjective and to work (actually be playable)
A game like Flappy Bird doesn't have good gameplay, but it somehow was able to have enough of a fun factor make a significant wave among mobile games during the last year.
Onamonapenia
Neo Member
I will never understand GAF, on one hand a great story cannot be a good game without good gameplay, yet most people here still praise Deadly Premonition as an amazing game. Hell just look at the Indigo Prophecy thread, people are gushing over that game and it is barely playable but has an off-the-walls-and-through-the-roof story. Personally, I agree with OP, I can stomach bad gameplay mechanics, but if a story bores me too much, I'll lose interest and stop playing. Then again, I play almost exclusively RPGs nowadays, so that might have something to do with it.
We're not a hive mind. As it turns out, a lot of people do enjoy narratively driven games—even on this site—regardless of what the responses in this thread lean towards.
That probably says more about the state of mobile games than anything else.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
This is mostly where I'm at. I find it absolutely bizarre people try so hard to separate these components. I guess because of years of reading reviews where they had separate grading sections like "Graphics", "Sound" "Gameplay" or something. Like, could you imagine anyone respectable doing that for a movie? "I'll give the acting a 8/10, and the soundtrack a 7/10, and the cinematography a 6/10, and the editing a 9/10, and...". Not that you can't see value in individual elements of production, but they all have to marry together to be worthwhile. They are not created in a vacuum. You can't put them in little separated boxes freed from the context of the experience they've been crafted for.
Its like that weird Mr. Hardcore Gamer rhetoric who talks about Gameplay first and Gameplay this and Gameplay that and like to pretend all his favorite games would be just as well liked if it was just box shapes moving on a grid or something. I find that such a stupid ass way to view video games. Bayonetta is so good because how it marries its incredible presentation to its top tier combat depth and accessibility. Metal Slug 3 is so good because how it creates this epic, bombastic, cartoon world through its incredible variety of sprite animations, weapon sound and visual effects, musical production, silly but destructive vehicles. Cave shmups are so good because on top of their industry standard production values are polished mechanics, cool scoring systems, and challenging-but-fair bullet/enemy patterns.
Video games are a combination of interactive and non-interactive elements forged together, sitting incomplete until a player picks it up and experienced it. Sometimes they do this through mostly 2D animated sprites and dialog with the player moving the script along in the Ace Attorney series, sometimes its stripping away to create a minimal, elegant, and elemental emotional experience with Journey, sometimes its with throwing a hundred monsters at you in a giant field, the screams of the bombers getting closer and closer until BOOM in Serious Sam, sometimes its picking out clothes and hair and eyebrows and stat allocation to make you more personally invested in your character in *insert WRPG here*. You have to look at what each and every game is going for and judge it on its own goals. I think approaching them with this "story >>> *" or "visuals/audio who cares" or "gameplaygameplaygameplay" pre-booted into your head does you, the game, and the developers a disservice.
Honey Bunny
Member
Me too. It's not a hard and fast rule. But there's a group of people who really seem to get off on saying it. Makes them feel superior, weirdly.
Yeah it works both ways it literally just depends on how much stock you put into either aspect.
I can't play spec ops the line or brother a tale of two sons because I don't find either fun they're supposed to have a great story but can't do it.
on the flip-side
I've burned out on games because they haven't had much in the way of a narrative or given me much context on why I should be playing through them.
Nose Master
Member
They both have their place. I'll slog through ho-hum gameplay for good plot, and vice versa. Gettin them both right, though? Magic.
Just like all other characteristics of a game, it depends on what kind of game it is.
Is gameplay as important as story in a point and click adventure game or RPG? I'd have a hard time saying "yes". I mean, the puzzles need to be good, the systems in place need to be enjoyable, but if the story sucks no one will want to stick around.
Same with the 60 fps argument. I don't need 60 fps in point and click adventure games, RPGs, or the vast majority of strategy games. Racing games, fighters, and fast paced action games? Sure does help.
Or hell, even graphics. VVVVV has incredibly simple graphics and is terrific. Same with Spacechem. Crusader Kings 2 doesn't hold up to Total War visually but is every bit as enjoyable in it's own way. Meanwhile there are entire genres of games that are massively improved by having better visuals.
Same goes for physics, save system mechanics, loading times, etc. etc.. Every game has it's own needs. The great games are ones were designers chose the right strengths and offset those (due to limited budget, system horsepower, and time there has to be something given up) with the right weaknesses.
Is gameplay as important as story in a point and click adventure game or RPG? I'd have a hard time saying "yes". I mean, the puzzles need to be good, the systems in place need to be enjoyable, but if the story sucks no one will want to stick around.
Same with the 60 fps argument. I don't need 60 fps in point and click adventure games, RPGs, or the vast majority of strategy games. Racing games, fighters, and fast paced action games? Sure does help.
Or hell, even graphics. VVVVV has incredibly simple graphics and is terrific. Same with Spacechem. Crusader Kings 2 doesn't hold up to Total War visually but is every bit as enjoyable in it's own way. Meanwhile there are entire genres of games that are massively improved by having better visuals.
Same goes for physics, save system mechanics, loading times, etc. etc.. Every game has it's own needs. The great games are ones were designers chose the right strengths and offset those (due to limited budget, system horsepower, and time there has to be something given up) with the right weaknesses.
lukeskymac
Member
That's some grade A bullshit right there.
Well when i think of my personal top games of all time, they all have had great stories to back up great gameplay. Games like MGS1, Butcher Bay, HL2, DeusX HR, these had it all, gameplay, audio and visuals that created amazing atmosphere, and a story to go with it. I'd take a game with great gameplay and atmosphere and a so so story, like Aliens Isolation over great story and atmosphere and so so gameplay, like Bioshock Infinite... so gameplay>story imo. But the best games deliver it all.
in the modern day with thing slike tell tale that is not true.
I know it's blasphemy around here, but I actually do for the most part.
Last time I checked, there are a lot less telltale-ish games made than any other types, which reflects market demand.
So story > gameplay, OK. How does logic work indeed.
lotsofotherstuff
Member
I so agree that its not black and white. I never said that those games are for everyone, just like a movie like Antichrist is not for everyone (I just said it because I saw it yesterday and couldn't come up with anything else). You can absolutely want different things out of your media. I for one doesn't like the Souls series one bit, but that doesn't mean I disapprove of people that do.
I have zero issues with someone saying "I like it when games focus on gameplay over everything else", I do have issues when someone says "Games should focus on gameplay over everything else". So we agree.
Let me tell you how dumb this is.
This is the video game equivalent of saying " how did you enjoy movies before color and sound, that is just a bonus " No , no it isn't that shit is the sole reason why some movies are good.
How games are made have changed, you sound like a very out of touch old man.
Yep, because the only games in which story has a big part are Telltale games and the games like them.
That's especially good coming from someone with a The Evil Within avatar. Do you think that game would be what it is if it rejected narrative and was only about gameplay?
Last time I checked, everyone was complaining about how every game tries to be a cinematic experience these days, which reflects market demand.
So gameplay > story, OK. How does logic work indeed.
Not every game with a good story instantly needs to be an Telltale-like adventure game, you're not making much sense.
Playing with subsets, you're really grasping, I like that.
You really should google 2014's top sellers.
Because starting the game off by saving the president is a really great story.
Magic Mushroom
Member
If I want a good story, I'll read a book. The word game implies play.
When I look at my favorite games of all time, they're all heavily focused on gameplay. Super Metroid, Tetris, Mario World, Zelda series, Resident Evil 4 and more recently games like Tropical Freeze and Bayonetta (2).
The latter was by far my favorite game last year. Infinitely replayable, because the gameplay is so incredibly rich.
I'm not against a good story, but I wil always value gameplay more.
When I look at my favorite games of all time, they're all heavily focused on gameplay. Super Metroid, Tetris, Mario World, Zelda series, Resident Evil 4 and more recently games like Tropical Freeze and Bayonetta (2).
The latter was by far my favorite game last year. Infinitely replayable, because the gameplay is so incredibly rich.
I'm not against a good story, but I wil always value gameplay more.
What. You're not making any sense at all. I'll try to decipher this, though:
- "Subsets"? Stop trying to establish a dichotomy between "story" and "gameplay"; they're not constantly mutually exclusive.
- What were 2014's top sellers? Destiny, Call of Duty, some sports games... what does this have to do with anything?
- You mean The Evil Within? So what you're saying is that the game would work if all of the needless, horror aesthetic driven by the game's narrative was removed and all you had left was a guy shooting and punching enemies that could very well just be grey boxes? That's an interesting perspective.
Gameplay > story, but the best games tell a story through their gameplay, like Papers, Please. For larger games I much prefer indirect, or environmental story telling, like in Dark Souls or Portal. I don't think cutscenes are good for the medium and I much prefer methods of telling a story that takes advantage of the things only video games can do.
With things like visual novels it's different as the purpose of that genre is to tell a story, and then have some gameplay in between to tie it all together. Then there's games like Mario which has practically no story and all gameplay. I don't think either are bad.
With things like visual novels it's different as the purpose of that genre is to tell a story, and then have some gameplay in between to tie it all together. Then there's games like Mario which has practically no story and all gameplay. I don't think either are bad.
lotsofotherstuff
Member
This is just me, but I love The Wolf Among Us and dislike Shadow of Mordor. I pushed myself through the first open world part of Shadow of Mordor, until I just went "This is not interesting, I'm going to play something else".
I wouldn't say that it is objectively better or worse though. I don't think things can objectively be something subjective. Subjectively for me though, The Wolf Among Us is a better game than Shadow of Mordor.
Schreckstoff
Banned
But people do just that, heck there's oscars for each individual category with just one 1 overall award.
Hey this is a great post. Of all the inane things people argue about on this forum, gameplay v story is probably the worst.
Mr_L
Member
This is precisely how I feel. One aspect being great should not excuse another for being poor. Sure, good gameplay can pick up some slack and give you a great experience, but acting like a game with an awful story should be excused because gameplay is all that matters is silly. If the creators are going through the effort to craft a story to tie into the gameplay, they should damn well know what they did wrong if it's bad. Take the game as a whole. You can still love it, but recognize just how much better it could be if its other elements were elevated.
gigantor21
Member
Of course both should be good, but if I have to choose one or the other than enjoyable gameplay and good gamedesign are far more important to me.
Persona 4 has one of the best stories I've ever seen in a game, but I had to see the last 3rd of it on Youtube because going through the dungeons was absolute torture for me. Meanwhile, I've been a huge fan of fighting games since I was little.
Persona 4 has one of the best stories I've ever seen in a game, but I had to see the last 3rd of it on Youtube because going through the dungeons was absolute torture for me. Meanwhile, I've been a huge fan of fighting games since I was little.
You say this like standards didn't change in 35 years.
"I wonder why people want to have control over a videogame, how did you enjoy watching tv before someone plugged a gaming console into it? Interactivity is a bonus."
ViewtifulJC
Banned
yes, for how they work in the context of that particular film, that particular story, that particular experience. Even when awarding individual components, its best on their contribution to the whole of the movie.
but you don't go into a movie thinking "music is the most important thing in a film. If I don't like it, NO MATTER WHAT THE MOVIE IS OR WHAT ITS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH, its bad". And that's what some of ya'll sound like. Valuing one thing above the whole, no matter what the whole actually is.
SkeptiMism
Member
They're really barely similar. Reading a book doesn't give you the same kind of fun that watching a movie does, and watching a movie doesn't give you the same kind of fun that playing a game does, no matter how important the story is. It's still a game, just as a movie is a movie and book is a book.
Also, a game focusing on the story doesn't mean that the gameplay has to be bad.
How can you like it? It's a silly, immature and pretty condescending idea that really needs to go away. Nobody should tell another person "you shouldn't do this at all, but you should do that other thing". Besides that, it's a false equivalency.
There'd be nothing wrong with that. It wouldn't mean the other things would have to bad in anyway. It would just mean that the person would like to convey the story specifically through that medium (because obviously each medium can tell stories in their own ways).
The style and word choices and such are very very, important, but that doesn't mean there would be anything wrong with someone wanting to concentrate specifically on the story. Again, it wouldn't mean that the other things wouldn't get attention. It would just mean that the person wanted to tell his story through that medium.
I find it slightly strange here that you group the vocals together with the intrumentals. In music, story is a very abstract concept when comparing to how it is in books and movies. Not to say it's not there, because it is obviously (even in pieces without any lyrics), but I'd argue that the thing in music that is more comparable to story in books and movies, is vocals.
Regardless, again, someone might just want to create these epic stories using music. There'd be nothing at all wrong in that.
Games are a very unique thing. If someone wants to create a story that is immersive, games are a good choice for that because of the interactivity. In that case, the gameplay would specifically serve the story, not the other way around, and thus the story would be more important.
And to repeat, this wouldn't mean that the gameplay would have to be shit or even minimal in any way - though as a side note there's absolutely nothing wrong with minimal gameplay either (for example Heavy Rain has a focus on story - which really isn't very good but that's not the point here - and has very minimal gameplay, but people liked it specifically as a game and it wouldn't work in the same way at all if it was a movie). It's just that a lot of people want to tell stories, and they need to choose the medium for it. The other things can serve this goal.
I'd guess most people actually mean narrative when they talk about story.
No it's very much a matter of opinion, and it's a fine opinion to have if you apply it to yourself, but it's immature and silly to try to make it as some universal fact, no offense.
We're not living in the past. The medium has evolved. The world changes you know.
Another false equivalency.
You guys should stop thinking it through and editing your posts.
Who the hell said remove story entirely?
Title reads story "bigger than" gameplay.
Gaming is a business where interactivity is king and the sales reflect that.
Now wrap your head around this.
I can deal with a crappy story, but bad gameplay will stop me dead in my tracks. At that point, if I want more story, I'll look it up on YouTube. There's no point in subjecting myself to bad gameplay mechanics just to "experience" the story. Not saying we can't have both, but at the end of the day gameplay > story for me.
Solemn_In_Berlin
Member
If the medium's ever gonna evolve as more than just "child's plaything", then no doubt we'll have to factor in the story. That being said, gameplay is just as important, I think. Madame Bovary and Ulysses aren't remembered for their stories as much as they're remembered for their styles.
They work hand in hand. But I agree mainly with OP. I enjoy good stories. They keep me engaged. Some of the most revered series is known for their stories. Gameplay is important but sometimes you want the narrative to make some sense or follow its own logic. You guys know this to be true.
Canis lupus
Member
They're equally important but it usually depends from genre to genre or even game to game. Fighting games: gameplay over story no debate. RPGs: story over gameplay (all the rpgs I played I remember them mostly from their stories, cast, the world they created etc. rather than the gameplay mechanics). If MGS, Uncharted or TLOU etc featured a dumm uninteresting main character with a generic, forgettable story and set pieces, they wouldn't be half the game they are.
It's also silly when people say gameplay>graphics but then complain older games feel too archaic and modern games too stupid.
Gameplay=Story=Graphics
.
It's also silly when people say gameplay>graphics but then complain older games feel too archaic and modern games too stupid.
Gameplay=Story=Graphics
.
Most of the time I need both to get the motivation to keep playing. I LOVED Fantasy Life's gameplay, but the complete lack of story, and the fact it forces you through the awful one that's there, has stopped me going back since my 12+ hour binge when I got it.
On the other hand, Dragon's Dogma's story was next to non existent for most of the game yet it's of my favourite RPGs of last gen because of the amazing gameplay. A mix of good story and good gameplay is perfect for me, even if the game doesn't perfect either.
That said, if I have to choose, I'll choose good gameplay over story any day. I story can be as great as it wants but if I'm not enjoying the actual game there's not going to be anything to hook me back in for those 10-70 so hours. I can ignore a bad/lacking story if the gameplay is captivating.
On the other hand, Dragon's Dogma's story was next to non existent for most of the game yet it's of my favourite RPGs of last gen because of the amazing gameplay. A mix of good story and good gameplay is perfect for me, even if the game doesn't perfect either.
That said, if I have to choose, I'll choose good gameplay over story any day. I story can be as great as it wants but if I'm not enjoying the actual game there's not going to be anything to hook me back in for those 10-70 so hours. I can ignore a bad/lacking story if the gameplay is captivating.
It's all context.
If I'm playing a story driven game, then yes story should be a huge focus for me to continue.
Not every game needs a story shoe horned into it. I don't need a huge sprawling plot in say Mario (though a change from saving Peach wouldn't hurt).
I know Platinum games are a darling around these parts but that is a company I wish would stay away from story telling. Keep it all in game and leave them to what they do best, gameplay.
If I'm playing a story driven game, then yes story should be a huge focus for me to continue.
Not every game needs a story shoe horned into it. I don't need a huge sprawling plot in say Mario (though a change from saving Peach wouldn't hurt).
I know Platinum games are a darling around these parts but that is a company I wish would stay away from story telling. Keep it all in game and leave them to what they do best, gameplay.
Zomba13
Member
Pretty much the bolded. I do appreciate a good story in a game with good characters, good character development and motivations and all that but first and foremost I want the game to be fun. That fun can come from great gameplay (such as Tetris or a Mario platformer) or from the way the mechanics interact with the story (like The Walking Dead dialouge choices).
Mainly though, I play games to have fun playing them. If they can provide a gripping story or make me think then all the better, as long as they are enjoyable to play. If I just want a good story then I'll watch a film or read a book.