IceDoesntHelp
Banned
and yet Bioshock is one of my favourite video games of all time.
Constantly replay it.
Constantly replay it.
Here's a couple of related games.
1979 Revolution is about the Iraq-Iran conflict, it's Telltale style and really well told.
This War Of Mine is about civilians surviving in wartime conflict, inspired by Bosnia.
I'm looking forward to RIOT Civil Unrest where you can play as police or protesters, and it's inspired by real events.
He is on point.
Well somebody's nerves are a little raw!
Hehe, this is great.
I don't think so at all. Especially number three. Very rarely do I watch a TV show and think that the people writing don't know how to write to the format of television.I feel like all these points could be leveled at other story telling mediums except books perhaps where writers have much more flexibility in things by the very nature of the medium.
I like thisThe thing is, humans make stories. They make stories with everything they can. They make stories with spoken words, written words, sung words, how about JUST notes? How about a single or multiple paintings? How about telling a story through a Rube Goldberg machine? We sit down and tell stories with our own choices and dice or just standing around pretending to be vampires with a GM thats nothing but a glorified referee. Stories in videogames are something to be expected and is Business as usual for humanity.
He is on point.
The format of television is extremely defined though. Either it's a long-form story divided into chapters, or it's a mini story every episode that ties together in an overarching storyI don't think so at all. Especially number three. Very rarely do I watch a TV show and think that the people writing don't know how to write to the format of television.
That doesn't mean every TV show is well written, but I can at least tell that they're aware that they're writing a TV show and are trying to plot themselves accordingly. Whereas there are plenty of games that downplay interactivity when it comes to plot and instead of making us get from point A to point B through game play, they opt to tell it through cut scenes like a movie or TV would.
I don't think so at all. Especially number three. Very rarely do I watch a TV show and think that the people writing don't know how to write to the format of television.
That doesn't mean every TV show is well written, but I can at least tell that they're aware that they're writing a TV show and are trying to plot themselves accordingly. Whereas there are plenty of games that downplay interactivity when it comes to plot and instead of making us get from point A to point B through game play, they opt to tell it through cut scenes like a movie or TV would.
In a medium where that is most stand out, unique and integral aspect of the art I don't know how you could argue that downplaying interactivity is a good thing. At that point you're downplaying the mediums greatest and most distinctive strength.The format of television is extremely defined though. Either it's a long-form story divided into chapters, or it's a mini story every episode that ties together in an overarching story
And downplaying interactivity is not a bad thing
Well yeah, obviously you can still fail while knowing the medium, but literally every good piece of art plays to its medium well.I'd say that still accounts for crappy story telling. Knowing the medium their writing does nothing for me if they can't do anything with it. A lot of authors of books know they're medium they're creating a story in and still drop the ball in all manners of ways across all genres.
What do you feel is an example of this?I think you would have to design some games completly different to avoid cutscenes. There are some things some games tries to do with their story that wouldn't really work only with gameplay. Some games work better without cutscenes, some don't. I don't think having cutscenes means the devs failed in writting a story for a game, because it depends on what kind of game they're making.
I don't think so at all. Especially number three. Very rarely do I watch a TV show and think that the people writing don't know how to write to the format of television.
That doesn't mean every TV show is well written, but I can at least tell that they're aware that they're writing a TV show and are trying to plot themselves accordingly. Whereas there are plenty of games that downplay interactivity when it comes to plot and instead of making us get from point A to point B through game play, they opt to tell it through cut scenes like a movie or TV would.
Whynotboth.gif
No, really. We can have great videogames with or without a story. I wouldnt want to live in a world where games like The Last of Us didn't exist.
The abscene or limiting of something can be an effective means of storytelling, presenting tone, etc, especially when that something is so integralIn a medium where that is most stand out, unique and integral aspect of the art I don't know how you could argue that downplaying interactivity is a good thing. At that point you're downplaying the mediums greatest and most distinctive strength.
Did you need NPCs telling you to go places to justify going to them? I think if anything, the problem was that the discoveries you found in places were mostly shrines. If they mixed those up and they were shrines, mazes, unique overworld bosses that would help, but I don't think story would necessarily aid that
But that's a completely different topic
I see. You're interpreting down playing interactivity as things like forced walking, which I have no problem with. When I say downplaying interactivity, I mean taking control out of the players hands and using cutscenes as the main means of progressing the story.The abscene or limiting of something can be an effective means of storytelling, presenting tone, etc, especially when that something is so integral
But yeah, even in general, I always find the hatred for stuff like the dreaded "forced walking" really ridiculous. I get why people dislike it, but the reaction shouldn't be irrational hate but rather "how can this be used most effectively".
Interactivity is as much a tool to storytelling in games as cuts are in film. We should embrace stuff like that. It's no different than filmmakers experimenting with how editing can tell a story a century ago
Yep. Give me my McGuffin.I think most games have shitty stories but I'd rather have them than not.
Ayy Druckmann trigger.
Anyways, the best stories in videogames for me came from games that fully, proudly embraced the videogame as a medium and weren't wannabe movies ashamed of what they are. I.e: Souls, Bloodborne, SotC, Portal/Half-Life.
They're far beyond what any gameplay-cutscene-gameplay-cutscene game could ever achieve. It doesn't matter how much Hollywood or "cinematic" they make the cutscenes and press-forward gameplay at Naughty Dog or how many more cutscenes can Kojima cram into his new game, I'll still be more interested and impacted by the world of SotC and BB than I ever will from any of these.
Don't even make me mention the walking simulators.
yes that is true. because that is obvious. Do i have to repeat myself? G...A..M..E. Gameplay should always come first. It is the thing most people play games for. I thought it should be a no brainer idea, but apparently not. Bad stories don't harm gameplay. Bad gameplay cannot be saved by good story.
I love posts like this as they act like movies, books, tv or any entertainment medium arent full of tripe more often than not. For every show like The Wire we get a dozen like The Big Bang Theory.
I feel like people put words in his mouth. He hasn't said that games with stories are bad, just that they are better without them. There is a difference.
Also, the market seems to agree with him. If you look purely at play time of all
the most played games come with little to no story. Are the most played games the best games? I tend to think so, but maybe that is debatable.
I don't mind cutscenes either, when they're Last of Us or Uncharted quality, or even Max Payne 3 (really loved MP3's stylish noir-ish presentation). At that level, the good voice acting, animations, etc. just make it an enjoyable animated scene that can enjoyed in the same way that a scene in a movie or show canI see. You're interpreting down playing interactivity as things like forced walking, which I have no problem with. When I say downplaying interactivity, I mean taking control out of the players hands and using cutscenes as the main means of progressing the story.
I'd take forced walking over cutscenes any day. Like you said, it can mold the pace of game play and change tone. All things completely lost when I have to sit there watching two people talk in a cutscene for five minutes.
Honestly, this is true.
I am getting tired of these pretentious articles written by pseudo-intellectuals moaning about how they think video games should be.
Didn't Miyamoto say something like that that to the Paper Mario Sticker Star devs? And look what a disaster it turned out to be.
He's a game designer and writer. It's like you discussing film theory versus Villeneuve talking about film. It's not a matter of dueling pseudo intellectuals, but of "pseudo-intellectual" and experienced person in the industryI think you are right, I also think its ironic that you would quote a Druckmann tweet re: pseudo-intellectuals.
What do you feel is an example of this?
This is the crux of what I'm trying to say. I feel that anymore cut scenes are overused. You shouldn't be taking control out of the players hands unless it's something you can't convey through game play. Cut scenes used to be rewards for progressing the story through game play, and now they're used TO progress the story. Which ends up downplaying the mediums strengths for no good reason.I don't mind cutscenes either, when they're Last of Us or Uncharted quality, or even Max Payne 3 (really loved MP3's stylish noir-ish presentation). At that level, the good voice acting, animations, etc. just make it an enjoyable animated scene that can enjoyed in the same way that a scene in a movie or show can
But they shouldn't be a crutch. Take The Last of Us for example. There were cutscenes, sure, but a lot of the relationship between the characters came from the gameplay. The cutscenes were the cappers on those segments, letting the story intensely focus on the characters in a way that's hard to do during direct control
But given that it's interactive, couldn't you just stand there like you normally would during a cutscene if you really wanted to?I feel some of the more intimate scenes in Uncharted 4 and The last of us works better as cutscenes for example. You could give the player something to do during these moments, but I think that would distract a bit from the dialouge and acting depending on the scene and I think the more directed cutscene works better in those cases.
A longstanding dream: Video games will evolve into interactive stories, like the ones that play out fictionally on the Star Trek Holodeck.
It's an almost impossible bar to reach, for cultural reasons as much as technical ones. One shortcut is an approach called environmental storytelling. Environmental stories invite players to discover and reconstruct a fixed story from the environment itself....
The approach raises many questions. Are the resulting interactive stories really interactive, when all the player does is assemble something from parts? Are they really stories, when they are really environments?
On the whole, there is nothing to fault in What Remains of Edith Finch. It's a lovely little title with ambitions scaled to match their execution. Few will leave it unsatisfied.
And yet, the game is pregnant with an unanswered question: Why does this story need to be told as a video game?
The whole way through, I found myself wondering why I couldn't experience Edith Finch as a traditional time-based narrative.
These are remarkable accomplishments. But they are not feats of storytelling, at all. Rather, they are novel expressions of the capacities of a real-time 3-D engine. The ability to render light and shadow, to model structure and turn it into obstacle, to trick the eye into believing a flat surface is a bookshelf or a cavern, and to allow the player to maneuver a camera through that environment, pretending that it its a character.
He's a game designer and writer. It's like you discussing film theory versus Villeneuve talking about film. It's not a matter of dueling pseudo intellectuals, but of "pseudo-intellectual" and experienced person in the industry
Doesn't change the fact that they're both experienced and informed individuals within their fields, and the guy who wrote this article isn'tVilleneuve is a fucking genius film-maker, please let's not mention him in the same utterance as Neil Druckmann...
If you think Inside doesn't have a story or narrative, you should play it againINSIDE is a game with no story whatsoever.
Shit just happens as you go and its up to you to figure it out. As much as I love that game, having even just a little bit of story would have put my mind at ease as its so frustrating to be intrigued by this world Playdead created but there is no information as to what it is or what's going on.