Support NeoGAF

[erpg]

Okay, so this is just Jaffe being defeatist. I didn't catch any cogent argument.

Call of Duty 1 (Stalingrad) made me cry out of fear. In a situation where I had no control. Actually, probably precisely because I had no control, and was used to having it. Explain that. And give me a reason why more people shouldn't try as hard as they can to deliver that kind of experience.
And more damning - I spent a little time on the official Assassin's Creed forums looking for tech help and did a little browsing of their General forums. You've got 14 year old boys there weeping for Ezio, a character they've watched grow from adolescence. It takes a lot of ego to believe that others can't experience the same kind of sensations you do from a Christmas commercial. Even more to preach about taking it away, or diminishing the efforts some put into trying to trigger emotion through structured story telling. There are people really connecting with that element of games, and if someone can catch lightning in a bottle and make it happen, I'm inclined to cheer them on.

and what is an anectode if not a extremely condensed story?

A 5 min discussion between friends on how they mastered p-linking in SF4 is no less a story than the length and breath of cutscenes in MGS4. The only difference is length, depth and emotional connection.

Those a pretty big differences, and I think it's obvious that one is in no way a replacement for the other. And they don't even step on each other's toes most of the time.

That was a lot of edits.

 

[The Technomancer]

The Half-Life games did it very well, and I think Portal's lacking in other areas (i.e. level of challenge, inconsistent pacing and puzzle design) that it feels just as "clumsy". Very few games have really nailed this kind of integration very well.

The biggest problem I have with Half-Life 2's cutscenes is that players almost universally spend them jumping around shooting the walls (based on my observation). You don't get that kind of impatience in film or books usually, so it says to me that the players probably aren't connecting with the story.

I've watched four or five people play parts of Portal 2 and something about the writing or the overall story or something grounds people and invests them in what's going on in front of them.

 

[MoonsaultSlayer]

The guy got burnt out on making GOW, couldn't fully realize his crying game and only made 2 games in 5-ish years(?) to questionable success.... Guess I'd be pissed about story games and how much effort it takes to keep up with the industry too if I were him.

No thanks. If this industry only featured "beat my high score, bro" games and fragfests, I'm done. I can't wait for Twisted Metal, but that's one game of that type vs all other types that I like.

Guess he didn't want the D&D types getting in on digitizing their "games". ONLY SHORT BURST BOARD GAMES PLEASE, YOU NERDS!

 

[Dragoon En Regalia]

Still partway through this, but already there are points that seem to be either ill-expressed or ill-advised. The idea of player authorship, for example, is for almost all games an absolute fallacy, particularly as he expresses it. He seems to opine that because some games aren't fully linear, they somehow allow the gamer to "create" their own story. In fact, most of these games do nothing else than allow the gamer to explore side stories or traverse one of several well-defined pre-determined paths. They are "choose your own adventure" books, where every adventure was already carefully authored by someone other than the player. Games like Minecraft may form better examples, but then again, is there really a compelling story in Minecraft, or is it just a really cool playground.

His comparison between sports and videogames is also absurd. Unfortunately it probably stems from the fact that the word "games" is attached to these interactive experiences that collectively we call "videogames". It's too late to change the word we use, but the fact is that unlike sports, games have no obligation to be fun. They have only to be compelling, which can occur in very different ways.

On the other hand, I do agree that making games for the express purpose of telling stories is a bad idea. The truth is that for most games the gameplay and the story are poorly integrated, and his notion that the interactive portion should be the focus is spot on. The interactive portion of the game should be the one to express the ideas and emotions of the developers, not the cut scenes or voice over.

This also ties into the fallacy of "emergent gameplay", the idea that new mechanics just pop up out of nowhere when playing a video game. That's a bunch of bull simply because every possibility in a video game only comes about as a combined result of the source code and hardware working in tandem, which the player gets to explore via indirect input for an output.

And modding a game doesn't count either.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

But at that point -- discussing the mechanics of a game -- doesn't that type of player created narrative exist independently of the story the game is trying to tell?

but isn't the whole point of this talk and the subsequent discusion here, is whether designers should allow one to suffer to strengthen the other?

If the mechanics of a game, or rather its gameplay systems, are shoddy, but the story is good then the discussion of the game centres on its story. If the gameplay is strong, but the story is weak, the opposite happens.

My point, and what I think jaffe is trying to get at, is that medium of videogames by its very nature are more forgiving of weaker stories with sound gameplay, so making sure the gameplay is tight is more important, because the narrative of the player mastering the game will more than make up for a game with a OK but only serviceable story.

Another thing he is trying to hint at, I believe is that this pursuit of better stories in games is wasting huge amounts of money. The poster children for this are games like L.A noire and any Ninja Theory title. Your wasting huge amounts of money on the right motion capture tech, voice talent and writers and not concentrating on whether the underlying game is sound.

This also ties into the fallacy of "emergent gameplay", the idea that new mechanics just pop up out of nowhere when playing a video game. That's a bunch of bull simply because every possibility in a video game only comes about as a combined result of the source code and hardware working in tandem, which the player gets to explore via indirect input for an output.

And modding a game doesn't count either.

so because something is a possibility, that means the designers originally envisioned it?

 

[Cartman86]

Listening to the Weekend Confirmed he was on it seems like there are just different kinds of people. For some people video game stories work. Some of my greatest memories involve story heavy games that aren't purely gameplay stories. Hell there are people who think FFXIII has an amazing story. Look at this user review of KoA: Reckoning that was going around twitter this morning. I might think they are insane, but I guess there is something for everyone.

 

[StuBurns]

Finished it. Some interesting stuff for sure, I'd love to know why Jaffe considers Ico a great game if story wise he's only getting 10% of the emotional impact from games he gets from some advert. Why dedicate six hours of playing a game which most people would consider to have fairly weak gameplay for a fraction of what you can get from twenty seconds of TV? It seems so bizarre, especially when he made God of War, a game which relied so heavily on the story at every turn. That's not to say people can't change their mind, of course they can, but I don't really understand why he'd have taken the game in the direction he did if he was getting so little from the storytelling in games.

 

[Dragoon En Regalia]

The biggest problem I have with Half-Life 2's cutscenes is that players almost universally spend them jumping around shooting the walls (based on my observation). You don't get that kind of impatience in film or books usually, so it says to me that the players probably aren't connecting with the story.

I do that too, but there's only so much you can do with the Source engine, animation constraints, and so forth. Portal did that sometimes too—neither game can really get away from that problem.

Sonic 3&K is still my favorite example, as the variety of environment changes and visual progression going from level to level, punctuated by short and effective transitions, makes for a fluid, replayable, and surprisingly-cinematic experience.

 

[Cartman86]

The biggest problem I have with Half-Life 2's cutscenes is that players almost universally spend them jumping around shooting the walls (based on my observation). You don't get that kind of impatience in film or books usually, so it says to me that the players probably aren't connecting with the story.

I've watched four or five people play parts of Portal 2 and something about the writing or the overall story or something grounds people and invests them in what's going on in front of them.

Yeah and I'm the kind of person who was immersed fully and never thought of jumping around the room when I first played it. I don't know if it's the fault of the game design in regards to storytelling/world building/gameplay or if some people just can't handle that much freedom.

 

[DDayton]

Hm, I guess I should say "these days". I've been meaning to play IHNMaIMS also
By creative control I mean actual influence over the pacing and structure of the game, not just "here is our world, write some cutscenes"

The problem is that it's hard to pin down how much the authors were or weren't in charge -- and part of me feels as though we'd get the same problem we so often have now when film-types get into games -- the game suddenly grinds to a halt for blocks of exposition.

Mother, however, was directed by an author...

 

[Dragoon En Regalia]

so because something is a possibility, that means the designers originally envisioned it?

Players discovered all sorts of unique stuff you could do in Spacewar that the designers hadn't considered themselves—but the code still allowed it to start. If we all had more brain processing power, then it might be possible to imagine the many possibilities in a game session all at once, but we don't have that luxury. The code is the code, and the code is the foundation.

 

[Vic]

I prefer to play games that are more on the sport aspect Jaffe is talking about, those that focus on gameplay and mechanics, than those that focus on telling a story. Not that games can't tell good stories, but most don't and I find myself playing the game mechanic focused games far more.

I agree with Jaffe's sentiment, but I doubt it will be a popular opinion.

I agree as well. After all, I'm an arcade gamer at heart.

 

[ShinjukoOtaku]

Finished it. Some interesting stuff for sure, I'd love to know why Jaffe considers Ico a great game if story wise he's only getting 10% of the emotional impact from games he gets from some advert. Why dedicate six hours of playing a game which most people would consider to have fairly weak gameplay for a fraction of what you can get from twenty seconds of TV? It seems so bizarre, especially when he made God of War, a game which relied so heavily on the story at every turn. That's not to say people can't change their mind, of course they can, but I don't really understand why he'd have taken the game in the direction he did if he was getting so little from the storytelling in games.

From listening to Jaffe on Weekend Confirmed i get the impression that he is more of a nuts and bolts gameplay mechanics guy as opposed to a story teller in a new medium.

Lets not forget that one of Ico's biggest hooks was the innovative gameplay mechanic of actively protecting yorda, i kind of feel like those were the aspects (plus art style) he admired the most.

could be wrong though-

oh and i also wholeheartedly agree that games should stop actively pursuing a linear narrative. if i want a story i'll read a book/comic/manga or watch something

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

Players discovered all sorts of unique stuff you could do in Spacewar that the designers hadn't considered themselves—but the code still allowed it to start. If we all had more brain processing power, then it might be possible to imagine the many possibilities in a game session all at once, but we don't have that luxury. The code is the code, and the code is the foundation.

well, im really not following your line of reasoning. If it is a way a game is played that is not in line with what was originally envisioned by the designers of the game, then it is emergent gameplay. whether the original code facilitated it is neither here nor there.

 

[outunderthestars]

David Jaffe and Naughty Dog stand on two opposite sides of the spectrum. I would love to see an argument between him and key members of that studio it would be interesting

I'd like to see this. I find myself more in the Jaffe camp. One can look at the Final Fantasy and Metal Gear games as perfect examples of games that make players stop playing for long periods of time to shove narrative down their throats. I wasn't a fan of Uncharted, and skipped the last two because of the heavy narrative focus.

I see an entire genre of games moving increasingly towards the video game equivalent of a Choose Your Own Adventure book.

That said, some people enjoy those games and I hope studios continue to make them.

Me, I'd rather play a game that focuses more on mechanics, while adding in enough narrative to keep you engaged. Bastion I think did this really well. The game was absurdly fun, and I still cried at the end.

We can have both.

 

[The Technomancer]

Sonic 3&K is still my favorite example, as the variety of environment changes and visual progression going from level to level, punctuated by short and effective transitions, makes for a fluid, replayable, and surprisingly-cinematic experience.

I do agree that S3&K did it pretty damn well. Cutscenes were almost universally under ten seconds, just enough to give you an idea whats going on

 

[SolidSnakex]

There's plenty of room in this industry for different types of games. A developer should be able to make a game that puts an emphasis on story if that's what fits their vision. Some gamers won't like it while others will. But you could say that about any game. There are plenty of gamers out there that don't like the old-school arcade approach where it's just stage after stage with nothing really to connect them.

Gamers will speak with their wallets at the end of the day. If they don't like a certain approach then they won't buy the title. But sales show that there are plenty of gamers out there that do like story focused titles.

 

[Dragoon En Regalia]

I do agree that S3&K did it pretty damn well. Cutscenes were almost universally under ten seconds, just enough to give you an idea whats going on

I now have the sinking suspicion that this cinematic focus inspired Takashi Iizuka to go full-steam-ahead with more cinematic elements in future Sonic games simply because of the approach S3&K took. A shame too, as this game in particular had a masterful flow to it, bridging the abstract level designs and settings of Mario games with descriptive visual and audio elements that enhanced the experience sublimely.

 

[Sylvrfonic]

So, I understand that the medium of games has to change. But, if Jaffe's appeal to executives to cease backing games with stories is successful I will certainly look back fondly at the times were video games created risky author narrative games like Mass Effect, Ico, The Darkness, Omikron, Full Throttle, The Longest Journey, ect.

I play games for stories and I can connect to the characters and the intended emotional content . I have, however, felt that since I can't connect to commercials on the same level that commercials that try to connect emotionally are a waste of time and a threat to the advertising medium. I mean sure I can mute or fast forward through these commercials. But, it would be better for all concerned if they did not exist.

 

[ShinjukoOtaku]

I see an entire genre of games moving increasingly towards the video game equivalent of a Choose Your Own Adventure book.

Japan has that great little niche of Visual Novels, a genre of game that beyond a few cursory choices lacks gameplay. I almost see Uncharted joining this camp, i mean:

whats the biggest thorn in Uncharted side? that when you die you have to re-do a set piece, a trait that kills the intended flow of the story and momentarily breaks the immersion for the player.

i wouldn't be surprised if eventually these big budget story games find a way to dismantle this in built penalty and instead somehow work it into a branching path kind of similar to what Heavy Rain attempted.

 

[outunderthestars]

Japan has that great little niche of Visual Novels, a genre of game that beyond a few cursory choices lacks gameplay. I almost see Uncharted joining this camp, i mean:

whats the biggest thorn in Uncharted side? that when you die you have to re-do a set piece, a trait that kills the intended flow of the story and momentarily breaks the immersion for the player.

i wouldn't be surprised if eventually these big budget story games find a way to dismantle this in built penalty and instead somehow work it into a branching path kind of similar to what Heavy Rain attempted.

That is a really good point! I could see that. It seems like a natural evolution for the genre.

 

[Doc Holliday]

wow I agree with him 100% already!

 

[Net_Wrecker]

I'd like to see this. I find myself more in the Jaffe camp. One can look at the Final Fantasy and Metal Gear games as perfect examples of games that make players stop playing for long periods of time to shove narrative down their throats. I wasn't a fan of Uncharted, and skipped the last two because of the heavy narrative focus.

I see an entire genre of games moving increasingly towards the video game equivalent of a Choose Your Own Adventure book.

That said, some people enjoy those games and I hope studios continue to make them.

Me, I'd rather play a game that focuses more on mechanics, while adding in enough narrative to keep you engaged. Bastion I think did this really well. The game was absurdly fun, and I still cried at the end.

We can have both.

I almost sit on both sides of the fence depending on which game we're talking about. Something like MGS I don't think is fair to point out as "doing it wrong" because it's still a VERY fun game to PLAY. You can skip all the narrative parts but the MECHANICS of the game will not suffer since they are completely separate.

My issue comes in the form of stuff like Half Life 2, or Uncharted 3 where the GAMEPLAY is stopped, or slowed significantly, by sometimes unskippable story scenes because they are "in gameplay" rather than standard cutscenes. Those are MORE offensive to me than a 40 minute Metal Gear Solid cutscenes because they'll STILL be a nuisance on my 2nd and 3rd playthrough of the game. If they were more naturally placed into the valleys of pacing IN GAMEPLAY to offset the peaks, I'd be a lot more forgiving of them. The desert stuff in Uncharted 3, for example, was just too much.

 

[Kifimbo]

Jaffe on Twitter.

Lots of people are officially stupid. I never said games should not have stories. Fuck sakes.

 

[StuBurns]

From listening to Jaffe on Weekend Confirmed i get the impression that he is more of a nuts and bolts gameplay mechanics guy as opposed to a story teller in a new medium.

Lets not forget that one of Ico's biggest hooks was the innovative gameplay mechanic of actively protecting yorda, i kind of feel like those were the aspects (plus art style) he admired the most.

could be wrong though-

oh and i also wholeheartedly agree that games should stop actively pursuing a linear narrative. if i want a story i'll read a book/comic/manga or watch something

Possibly, it's a nice game, but in terms of the pure mechanics, I can't imagine people lauding it. The reason it's loved is pretty much the story more or less.

I'm honestly not sure what I think about this. It's based on the premise modern games are closer to chess than they are to an action film, I don't think that's actually true anymore. If you look at the growth of other mediums, literature spawned theatre, which spawned cinema, which spawned serialized television. At no point did the initial medium die. We still have plays, despite the existence of films. I think directly connecting those thousand year old board games to something like CoD is kind of absurd. It's much more akin to a branch from that board game tree, not unlike film from theatre to me.

You certainly don't need a story, and it shouldn't ever stifle the gameplay, but if the developer believes it will enhance the experience, and can do it effectively, they certainly should. Ico would be a vastly inferior game if they removed the story.

 

[theBishop]

Jaffe's been saying this about games since Heartland was cancelled in like 2006. And that game sounded fucking awesome.

Since then he's worked on 2 car combat games.

Not to take anything away from the guy, but I don't see Jaffe coming up with lots of original mechanics. And his best work is cinematic.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Jaffe: More games should play to the strengths of games like Deus Ex while still having stories. Stories shouldn't have top billing when the games are pitched as that sort of thinking is believing your own hype.

GAF: Oh my god Jaffe is such a moron. I only play games because they have stories.

 

[Orayn]

I absolutely agree with his message. Over-emphasizing story leads to a lot of shitty games. They can still be fine entertainment experiences, mind you, but they fail as games far too often.

 

[ShinjukoOtaku]

I'm honestly not sure what I think about this. It's based on the premise modern games are closer to chess than they are to an action film, I don't think that's actually true anymore.

i totally agree. as OutUnderTheStars pointed out, it's almost like a split between two types of development philosophies.

The Videogame: Call of Duty Multiplayer, Twisted Metal, Beat Em Ups, Sport games, anything that places an emphasis on mechanics over narrative

Interactive Fiction: Uncharted, Call Of Duty Single Player, Heavy Rain, JRPGs

admittedly it's a pretty flimsy example but you can almost sense a divide taking place.

 

[Net_Wrecker]

Jaffe: More games should play to the strengths of games like Deus Ex while still having stories. Stories shouldn't have top billing when the games are pitched as that sort of thinking is believing your own hype.

GAF: Oh my god Jaffe is such a moron. I only play games because they have stories.

Seriously. Nobody is saying "Let's have Pong and Tetris or nothing at all."

 

[Dragoon En Regalia]

To me: games need context, an environment around which an immersive experience can be set up with few seams if any at all. Some genres are better at this than others (and, if you've got a good enough argument, it's possible to rank whole genres by how well they apply certain mechanisms related to the whole immersion factor). Classic cartoons, to me, are currently the most well-known distilled examples of how to understand the compromised between game progression and providing context and development to a fiction.

 

[outunderthestars]

Jaffe: More games should play to the strengths of games like Deus Ex while still having stories. Stories shouldn't have top billing when the games are pitched as that sort of thinking is believing your own hype.

GAF: Oh my god Jaffe is such a moron. I only play games because they have stories.

He is not saying that games shouldn't have narrative, only that the narrative should not get in the way of the gameplay. Deus Ex was used as an example because control was rarely taken away from the player to maintain the narrative drive of the game.

To me: games need context, an environment around which an immersive experience can be set up with few seams if any at all. Some genres are better at this than others (and, if you've got a good enough argument, it's possible to rank whole genres by how well they apply certain mechanisms related to the whole immersion factor). Classic cartoons, to me, are currently the most well-known distilled examples of how to understand the compromised between game progression and providing context and development to a fiction.

context and immersion can be distinctly different things than narrative. Call of Duty multiplayer and Madden has context and immersion, but little to no narrative.

 

[Necron]

I have to agree with David Jaffe for the most part. Interactivity should be the main focus of a game. However, atmosphere is just as important because this is what makes a game and the medium stand out. For people to be completely immersed it takes a fine balance between both of these components and there are some examples like Portal and Bioshock where this works brilliantly.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

this is a bit old but I still find this mans writings in step with my own thinkings on the issue.

Warning: its a long read.

http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/juul-gts/

 

[Incendiary]

I think both types of games have their place in the market, however for me story-based games have to have decent gameplay for me to be interested in them. I didn't mind scrolling through all the text in 999 because the puzzles, where I got to play, were awesome and challenged my mind. On the flipside, the gameplay in FFXIII wasn't strong enough to grab me, which means I got bored of the story quickly.

The fact is, sometimes I just want to play bite-sized chunks of games where I can turn my brain off, and when I do that I turn to games like Super Meat Boy, Rayman Origins, Geometry Wars, etc. Games that don't have a story, or at least have a minimalist narrative. And sometimes I want to immerse myself in a huge story and environment and just spend hours upon hours playing one game and realize I haven't eaten in hours at 4 in the morning. And for that I'll turn to Skyrim, or Fallout, or other story-based narratives.

Regardless of opinion, though, the fact is without the "game," video games are just video. Like board games, without the game you've just got a board, and people get bored. Gaming, any type of gaming, has to keep the participants engaged. If you play a game for hours and don't get bored, the game's done it's job. Video games that keep their players engaged even through cut-scenes or whatever have succeeded in their goal. As soon as you start going "ugh, not ANOTHER cut-scene" then the game's lost focus.

 

[Coxy]

why cant we have all kinds of games? Stop trying to force stories into games about shooting things and stop dumbing down RPGs to appeal to people who want to shoot things. Companies need to stop trying to homogenize design, there can be different types of game with different focuses

 

[Net_Wrecker]

I have to agree with David Jaffe for the most part. Interactivity should be the main focus of a game. However, atmosphere is just as important because this is what makes a game and the medium stand out. For people to be completely immersed it takes a fine balance between both of these components and there are some examples like Portal and Bioshock where this works brilliantly.

You don't need a narrative to create a great atmosphere though. Bioshock with no narrative context is still an incredibly atmospheric game thanks to art direction, sound, gameplay interactions with the Big Daddy's, etc. etc. On top of that, you can make a story with atmosphere ALONE which is something many games don't seem to understand. Not everything in a game needs to have exposition or a cutscene accompanied with it. I thought Left 4 Dead was great at that. Let players fill in their own gaps, or let characters fill those gaps in WHILE you're playing.

 

[Dragoon En Regalia]

context and immersion can be distinctly different things than narrative. Call of Duty multiplayer and Madden has context and immersion, but little to no narrative.

There isn't a narrative to a football game? Granted, it isn't made utterly explicit to the viewer or the player—either example's fine—but the timeline of events is still there, working on contextual clues and progression. I guess they can be distinct, but they can just as easily be meshed together!

Juul is full of it, I say. His "half-real" logical flop doesn't help his credibility as a game academician.

 

[StuBurns]

You don't need a narrative to create a great atmosphere though. Bioshock with no narrative context is still an incredibly atmospheric game thanks to art direction, sound, gameplay interactions with the Big Daddy's, etc. etc. On top of that, you can make a story with atmosphere ALONE which is something many games don't seem to understand. Not everything needs to have exposition or a cutscene accompanied with it. I thought Left 4 Dead was great at that.

Ironically, BioShock's story is a critique on exactly what Jaffe was talking about.

 

[Teknoman]

Finished it. Some interesting stuff for sure, I'd love to know why Jaffe considers Ico a great game if story wise he's only getting 10% of the emotional impact from games he gets from some advert. Why dedicate six hours of playing a game which most people would consider to have fairly weak gameplay for a fraction of what you can get from twenty seconds of TV? It seems so bizarre, especially when he made God of War, a game which relied so heavily on the story at every turn. That's not to say people can't change their mind, of course they can, but I don't really understand why he'd have taken the game in the direction he did if he was getting so little from the storytelling in games.

Im glad you beat me to the punch on the subject of God of War. Maybe he's just had a change of heart since he left the series in other hands? Regardless there is room for both...developers should just focus on what kind of game they want to create, and then decide the appropriate amount of "story" for that game.

God of War seemed to achieve a really nice balance for an action game. A scene to open and explain the purpose of the current area, and then a scene to wrap up the events of the area you were leaving, leading into the next.

 

[Barkley's Justice]

awesome, jaffe.

 

[Goldmund]

Games shouldn't strive to have the philosophical, intellectual and emotional impact of cookie ads. Great talk.

 

[ElRenoRaven]

As I others have mentioned he is right. He's not saying you can't have a story. He's saying that it should compliment your gameplay because you're making a game first and foremost. Instead some developers will focus on telling the story instead of making a game that is fun to play. If they want to tell the story at the expensive of gameplay then why not make a fucking movie? It's a point I've asked many times with some of these games.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

i totally agree. as OutUnderTheStars pointed out, it's almost like a split between two types of development philosophies.

The Videogame: Call of Duty Multiplayer, Twisted Metal, Beat Em Ups, Sport games, anything that places an emphasis on mechanics over narrative

Interactive Fiction: Uncharted, Call Of Duty Single Player, Heavy Rain, JRPGs

admittedly it's a pretty flimsy example but you can almost sense a divide taking place.

I play UC2 many times and i play it for the game play not story .
Put hundreds of hour into JRPGs for game play again to say there interactive fiction just because they got a story is bull shit .
While they might have a story i don't see how they put any less emphasis on mechanics compare to story .

 

[hlhbk]

The day they stop moving the gaming medium forward is the last day I am a gamer and I believe gaming will die. Some of the stories in games are the best in any medium, and the best thing about it is you actually are interacting with the story. Outside of sports games I will never EVER buy a multi player game only.

Star Wars TOR is a great example. Up until it released I hated MMO's, but the story telling in that game has me hooked. If anything the industry should be moving more towards pushing story telling than anything else in gaming.

 

[Firefox]

He's right we need more Angry Bird type of games

 

[GreggTheGrimReaper]

Im glad you beat me to the punch on the subject of God of War. Maybe he's just had a change of heart since he left the series in other hands? Regardless there is room for both...developers should just focus on what kind of game they want to create, and then decide the appropriate amount of "story" for that game.

God of War seemed to achieve a really nice balance for an action game. A scene to open and explain the purpose of the current area, and then a scene to wrap up the events of the area you were leaving, leading into the next.

I always wondered what the story of Bonk was all about.

 

[Goldmund]

As I others have mentioned he is right. He's not saying you can't have a story. He's saying that it should compliment your gameplay because you're making a game first and foremost. Instead some developers will focus on telling the story instead of making a game that is fun to play. If they want to tell the story at the expensive of gameplay then why not make a fucking movie? It's a point I've asked many times with some of these games.

There have always been more terrible storytellers than movie contracts.

 

[Teknoman]

As I others have mentioned he is right. He's not saying you can't have a story. He's saying that it should compliment your gameplay because you're making a game first and foremost. Instead some developers will focus on telling the story instead of making a game that is fun to play. If they want to tell the story at the expensive of gameplay then why not make a fucking movie? It's a point I've asked many times with some of these games.

Asura's Wrath is a prime example of what happens when people cant achieve a good balance.

That being said, I dont care how good an RPG's battle system is...if it doesnt have something resembling a story to follow, I end up losing interest fast. Case in point: Resonance of Fate. The battle system was pretty fun, but the lack of story really killed it for me. Valkyria Chronicles on the other hand had a good balance.

 

[Ghost_Protocol]

Wow, I've never disagreed with an entire speech before.