Support NeoGAF

[brandonh83]

But I feel that right now, storytelling is the most important thing.

If that's the case, studios need to be hiring better writers. The reason people fret when a studio talks about narrative in games is because most game narratives are complete trash. So when they say oh, we're putting story above everything else, I would say a number of people see that as "okay so I can expect a mediocre plot with shoddy dialogue with some alright gameplay to go along with it." It's not exactly a ringing endorsement in a medium that is by no means exceptional at writing.

 

[Bundy]

I think story is always going to be at the top.....

Perfect! The right game for me.

Doesn't sound like gameplay is their top priority. I love RAD, and I'm super excited for this game, and story is very important to me, but I want a game to be fun. It's crucial.

Who says it isn't?

come launch this game will reveal itself as a grand swiftian allegory for all the most rotten trends in sony's first party output.

setting is still neat, though.

Another ghst post, where he is shitting on Sony.
Man, what a suprise.

 

[Footos22]

come launch this game will reveal itself as a grand swiftian allegory for all the most rotten trends in sony's first party output.

setting is still neat, though.

Hi I'm ghst and I never have anything positive to say about any Sony game in every thread involving a Sony game.

 

[meta4]

So instead of playing a game that lets you do, among things to do in it's weird open world, is slide on a rail, you would rather a game just have you walk on rails the entire time?

Do what other things? So am I supposed to appreciate the game because it is open world ?Are open world games naturally riveting or does game design determine whether a game is good?

 

[imtehman]

Not even shocked LOL. Its like games somehow can't be interesting and innovating from multiple angles. Will be a bargain bin pickup whenever I get a ps4.

its a single player game with no coop or multiplayer, you can rent this over the weekend and be good, no need to wait!

 

[axisofweevils]

This mindset is exactly what's wrong with modern AAA game development. You're making a game, not a movie.

 

[Rurunaki]

:/ I have a feeling this isn't going to be Sony's answer to Gears, of what I was hoping it would be.

Yeah, that quote doesn't inspire much enthusiasm.

I think this game is RAD's answer to ND's Uncharted. I'm more inclined to think that Sony's devs are in competition with one another.

 

[ZeroMaverick]

If that's the case, studios need to be hiring better writers. The reason people fret when a studio talks about narrative in games is because most game narratives are complete trash. So when they say oh, we're putting story above everything else, I would say a number of people see that as "okay so I can expect a mediocre plot with shoddy dialogue with some alright gameplay to go along with it." It's not exactly a ringing endorsement in a medium that is by no means exceptional at writing.

Well, I certainly agree that better writers would make for better stories. But the fact that it's been done before (great stories) seems to indicate that it's not the medium that is to blame.

 

[Dark_castle]

I hardly knew ya, Ready At Dawn.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

Yep, I totally agree with this approach. It's time the industry grew up.

I find this perspective to be the antithesis of everything great that video games are and have been. It's escapism, it's fun. I have never bought a console or gaming PC for the main purpose of being told a story, and never to feel like I'm doing something mature or grown up in a socially acceptable context.

 

[Draft]

There is no chance these clowns produce a worthwhile narrative with their cast of crime fighting super heroes shooting steampunk laserguns at werewolves. That premise would be at a disadvantage in traditional storytelling formats. But at least Syfy Originals have the benefit of pacing. The story segments are going to be broken up by that pesky gameplay, so whatever pathos manages to survive the immortal in a mortal world navel gazing is going to be churned up when the player spends the next 30 minutes failing a turret sequence.

The Order distills everything I don't like about modern gaming into one obnoxious AAA epic. Apologies to those who are working very hard on the cutscenes, then gameplay, presumably in that order.

 

[fedexpeon]

So instead of playing a game that lets you, among other things to do in it's weird open world, slide on a rail, you would rather a game just have you walk on rails the entire time?

Yes.
Linear gameplay is the best gameplay for narrative driven game.
I like the UC series much more than TLoU because of how linear UC is. I want to see the set pieces, I want to see the next cutscene, and I want to know how his adventure will end in a timely manner.
Exploration and sandbox are horrible in term of story telling since it slows down the pacing with stupid crap like collecting stuff, and doing side-quests.
AC/FO/GTA...great story? Nope. Great gameplay? Debatable. Open world genre is a hit and miss, and the only thing that makes them playable is theirs gameplay...which is average at best since game rarely evolves from the standards.

 

[Zeliard]

I've seen many claim that they desire for games to be taken serious, not treated as toys. If that's what you want, then let them mature in the areas that they need to. I would hope that it is unanimous that one of the places games need to evolve the most is storytelling, character development, and an ability to capture the human experience.

When I think of serious, mature fare with an emphasis on character development and an "ability to capture the human experience," I think "immortalized Knights of the Round Table blowing apart monsters with rifles and grenades."

 

[ZeroMaverick]

So instead of playing a game that lets you, among other things to do in it's weird open world, slide on a rail, you would rather a game just have you walk on rails the entire time?

There have been plenty of boring open world games.

 

[TheSlySoul]

The reason people fret when a studio talks about narrative in games is because most game narratives are complete trash.

Pretty much. My main deal is most action games try to be like Michael Bay. The problem is Bay is a terrible writer. Valve has no issue with this, because Portal and Half-Life blended both elements just fine. Telltale have good writers, but the gameplay (aside from point 'n click) ranges from "ok" to "yuck". Danganronpa is the last game I felt to blend gameplay and story together for an enjoyable experience. I would love more AAA games to have a good story.

 

[Freeman]

A valid approach. Not all game need to focus on gameplay there is room for many different experiences, as it has been proved again and again.

They are confident in their vision and aware that it won't please everyone.

 

[ZeroMaverick]

When I think of serious, mature fare with an emphasis on character development and an "ability to capture the human experience," I think "immortalized Knights of the Round Table blowing apart monsters with rifles and grenades."

Which is exactly why I devoted a paragraph to saying how I don't know that Ready at Dawn is the studio to do what I was referring to. I'm arguing on behalf of an opposition to the rampant, "What the fuck? Games are gameplay first!" posts.

 

[OldRoutes]

There is no chance these clowns produce a worthwhile narrative with their cast of crime fighting super heroes shooting steampunk laserguns at werewolves. That premise would be at a disadvantage in traditional storytelling formats. But at least Syfy Originals have the benefit of pacing. The story segments are going to be broken up by that pesky gameplay, so whatever pathos manages to survive the immortal in a mortal world navel gazing is going to be churned up when the player spends the next 30 minutes failing a turret sequence.

The Order distills everything I don't like about modern gaming into one obnoxious AAA epic. Apologies to those who are working very hard on the cutscenes, then gameplay, presumably in that order.

Wow... that's incredibly harsh. But I kinda agree with all of that. Quantum Break seems to be doing the same nasty thing, too, and it's just so sad that I don't feel any kind of connection with those games.

Now when they come out and straight up tell us "Well, we kinda have to do a game around it", I'm more than certain most of them just want to be movie directors.

A valid approach. Not all game need to focus on gameplay there is room for many different experiences, as it has been proved again and again.

And I agree with that, too ; more for everyone.

 

[leroidys]

[SARCASM]
I can't wait to see where they take the epic story of dudes shooting monsters and losing bros in the action. Surely they will break new grounds in narrative fiction.
[/SARCASM]

[IMHO]
I think they may be in the wrong industry.
[/IMHO]


I'm not discounting the game until I play it, but this statement by the developer certainly saps my confidence. To be clear I LOVE story in games, but when it is an organic part of the game and it emerges from gameplay, a la Souls, Super Metroid, or Shadow of the Colossus, Half-Life, Portal, etc.

 

[Omega]

I gave zero fucks about Uncharted: Victorian edition before, but after this

Game director (Dana Jan): I think story and visuals are very high. Gameplay is something that... it's a game, we make games, we can't get around it.

I care even less. If it were a PS+ game I wouldn't even waste my time downloading it.

Sorry you couldn't cut it in the movie industry or even the animated movie industry.

 

[meta4]

When I think of serious, mature fare with an emphasis on character development and an "ability to capture the human experience," I think "immortalized Knights of the Round Table blowing apart monsters with rifles and grenades."

Yeah because that cannot be treated seriously right? Wonder why Nolan made the Dark Knight so sombre. Afterall Batman is just a dude running around the city in a cape. No character development at all...

 

[Rurunaki]

This mindset is exactly what's wrong with modern AAA game development. You're making a game, not a movie.

Good news for you. You can have a pick of the litter from the seasonal AAA titles i.e. House of CODs, Battlefield, Assassin's Creed, and so on without this "mindset" you're pointing out.

 

[Woorloog]

A valid approach. Not all game need to focus on gameplay there is room for many different experiences, as it has been proved again and again.

Provided the gameplay is good enough... I think some people are worrying whether this will be the case, I know i am.

 

[Silky]

Oh wow.

From the Daxter developers, no less....one of my favorite titles from them....

Yeah, I dunno about this game anymore. Certainly isn't for me.

 

[BabyFaceKillah]

its a single player game with no coop or multiplayer, you can rent this over the weekend and be good, no need to wait!

Wait there is no Co-Op? Wtf This game better be long or it is just a weekend rental.

 

[Rogue_Ledr]

The David Cage logic.

Not too fervent and staunch in that belief.

 

[clutch.as.it.gets.]

Gameplay is something that... it's a game, we make games, we can't get around it.

Wow!

So far i thought i would get a Gears of War like game in a different setting. Means solid mechanics, great graphics but with a little bit more story.

But this quote... wow!

Sounds like 2 min cutscene, 2 min gameplay, 2 min cutscene, 2 min quick time events, 2 min gameplay, 4 min cutscene...

 

[coolasj19]

When I think of serious, mature fare with an emphasis on character development and an "ability to capture the human experience," I think "immortalized Knights of the Round Table blowing apart monsters with rifles and grenades."

Y'know, I'm gonna have to ask you (very nicely of course) to re-iterate the point you're trying to make here. I wanted to say something about people interpreting information how they want to interpret it but my point would be moot if I did the same to your post that I don't understand. Sarcasm? Facetiousness? I really can't tell. They aren't immortal as far as I know and even if they are, immortal humans are humans too.

The quote in question is basically a rorschach test. It means what you want it to mean.

 

[ZeroMaverick]

This mindset is exactly what's wrong with modern AAA game development. You're making a game, not a movie.

You must hate post-modernism

 

[besada]

Yeah because that cannot be treated seriously right? Wonder why Nolan made the Dark Knight so sombre. Afterall Batman is just a dude running around the city in a cape. No character development at all...

I think maybe you're talking about different things, if you think The Dark Knight was a good example of characterization and character development.

 

[GribbleGrunger]

Why are people so worried about this approach? Go and play TLOU to see exactly what is possible if you free yourself from the restraints of shallow thinking. Kill COD.

 

[Glittering Crux]

Another ghst post, where he is shitting on Sony.
Man, what a suprise.

Sounds like he's just the opposite of you and likes games that embrace gameplay rather than pretend to be a movie. He's not wrong.

 

[Codeblue]

It's actually funny that people think gameplay can evolve in a vacuum. It's actually funny that when people hear that developers-fuck it-artists want to explore avenues that extend beyond the conventional means, they lose their minds. How far do these people expect the 3rd Person Shooter genre to grow? How divine do these same people see the artists that create these experiences? What unlimited resources and time do these people somehow manifest from seemingly no where? If the industry is to grow, more and more avenues must be utilized. It seems that video games-much like other similar industries-will eventually split completely. In the same way that we have pop music and deeper listening experiences, commercial fiction and literature, debased set piece movies with watered down plots and movies that chariot more developed ethos, games will follow suit.

I've never played a Ready at Dawn title. I'm not claiming that these developers are any more qualified than any others. I've never played The Order, and the bits they've shown do look to have generic gameplay. But the outrage that has sprouted from their desire to craft better stories is, in many ways, utterly confusing. Not every game can revolutionize the way we play them. The Last of Us certainly didn't. Bioshock Infinite certainly didn't. But both titles excelled at crafting interesting, moving, and "mature" stories.

I've seen many claim that they desire for games to be taken serious, not treated as toys. If that's what you want, then let them mature in the areas that they need to. I would hope that it is unanimous that one of the places games need to evolve the most is storytelling, character development, and an ability to capture the human experience.

True, not everyone wants this from games, and that's what will cause the aforementioned split.
And yes, it would be amazing if every game could revolutionize things. It would be amazing if every game could be perfect. But I feel that right now, storytelling is the most important thing.

The Order 1886 won't exist in a vacuum. If they can craft a story in the ways they are claiming, then it will inspire and change all of the games that come after it. Essentially, it could be another domino to ignite others that follow, others that MAY provide a perfect experience in gameplay, story, etc.


Tl;dr: "Well, that's like, your opinion man."

Speaking on the whole, and not this game in particular:

The problem is that game story telling is being influenced by Hollywood instead of games like Mother. I'm not sure I'd call it maturing if we're moving further and further from using gameplay as our means to tell a story instead of cinematics.

 

[brandonh83]

Well, I certainly agree that better writers would make for better stories. But the fact that it's been done before (great stories) seems to indicate that it's not the medium that is to blame.

Of course it's not the actual medium itself that is to blame, just the territory that comes with it. It's the fact that game designers are hired to design videogames, not write terrific scripts. If they want to push storytelling they need to hire the appropriate talent.

Pretty much. My main deal is most action games try to be like Michael Bay. The problem is Bay is a terrible writer.

I think this can be said about your typical military shooter trying to imitate the large action spectacle of Bay's films, but to be fair to the guy he doesn't actually write any of the scripts that he shoots.

 

[DemurOnion]

"Gameplay is something that... it's a game, we make games, we can't get around it."

This is my favorite quote.

Shucks - *looks around* - this is a game studio, right? Well, I guess we gotta stuff that gameplay thing in there. Can't do anything about that.

In context like this it seems weird, but thinking a little more abstractly it seems they want to go beyond gaming into the realm of art like film, poetry, etc. So be it. The story needs to be absolutely killer quality though or it all falls apart.

For all the game devs that tout stories I swear to god I could have written better scripts than some of these games in my sleep. I hope these guys follow through.

 

[teiresias]

So if gameplay is third on the list of priorities and story is first. . . and they've delayed the game . . . does that mean the story sucks right now? Why delay the game for your distant third priority? They're going to "clean up that story in level 6" with the extra few months of dev time?

 

[nib95]

I find this perspective to be the antithesis of everything great that video games are and have been. It's escapism, it's fun. I have never bought a console or gaming PC for the main purpose of being told a story, and never to feel like I'm doing something mature or grown up in a socially acceptable context.

Traditional, fun games with vapid characters and nonsensical and pointless stories such as Mario, Zelda etc will still be as as prominent as they always were, the problem is that video gaming haven't managed to properly intertwine great narrative with great gameplay aside from a rare few, and the latter is an evolutionary stage of game design that if implemented well, retains the fun, but gives new meaning and emotional clout to everything else surrounding the core gameplay.

See Last of Us, Bioshock, GTA V etc.

Uncharted 3 is a great example of why gameplay and set piece design should follow narrative and not the other way around. Compare it to Uncharted 2. By designing the levels and scenarios first, and then forcing the story to coincide with them, you get a story that feels disjointed, and characters and overall pacing that just isn't realistically fleshed out. What Ready at Dawn is suggesting here is absolutely the way it should be done if you want a cohesive narrative to match solid gameplay.

 

[Comfort Jones]

My confidence is through the roof.

Yeah I don't understand how people are trying to defend this. It's sad how developers don't seem to think they can tell a story without "cinematic" stuff getting in the way of the actual game.

 

[Opus Angelorum]

Y'know, I'm gonna have to ask you (very nicely of course) to re-iterate the point you're trying to make here. I wanted to say something about people interpreting information how they want to interpret it but my point would be moot if I did the same to your post that I don't understand. Sarcasm? Facetiousness? I really can't tell. They aren't immortal as far as I know and even if they are, immortal humans are humans too.

The quote in question is basically a rorschach test. It means what you want it to mean.

If I can speak on his behalf, I believe he was basically stating there is no way this games premise could lead to a mature and serious game.

 

[TropicanaTwista]

Dont know what people are getting so worked up about. Video games are a form of entertainment. Some games do it different than others. Personally I like this approach.

 

[ZeroMaverick]

Speaking on the whole, and not this game in particular:

The problem is that game story telling is being influenced by Hollywood instead of games like Mother. I'm not sure I'd call it maturing if we're moving further and further from using gameplay as our means to tell a story instead of cinematics.

While that is true, plenty of stories in games aren't influenced by Hollywood. I agree that maturing would consist of moving past the "Hollywood" phase.

 

[JimiNutz]

I hate statements like these.
When making videogames gameplay should be the number one priority above all else.
Amazing visuals I get at the movies, amazing storytelling I get from books.

I'm not saying videogames shouldn't strive for all three but gameplay should always come first.

I'm sure The Order will be good though. Probably just a poorly worded quote.

 

[Opiate]

I've seen many claim that they desire for games to be taken serious, not treated as toys. If that's what you want, then let them mature in the areas that they need to. I would hope that it is unanimous that one of the places games need to evolve the most is storytelling, character development, and an ability to capture the human experience.

I don't really agree, any more than I think movies need to add gameplay mechanics in order to be taken seriously, or music needs to be interactive to be mature.

Please also note that games already are taken seriously: Go and Chess champions are not only considered serious, but often brilliant people. I think we'll find that the games which are ultimately taken seriously are actually the very game-y games, and not the games which try to shoehorn the strengths of other mediums (e.g. storytelling) in to this one.

 

[Sami+]

That's fine with me, so long the gameplay and story are both good. I'm interested in hearing what Naughty Dog would say about the subject, and how their games are made.

 

[brandonh83]

So if gameplay is third on the list of priorities and story is first. . . and they've delayed the game . . . does that mean the story sucks right now? Why delay the game for your distant third priority? They're going to "clean up that story in level 6" with the extra few months of dev time?

It's not likely that black and white. For the game to be this far into development I'm sure their story was locked long ago. If that isn't the case I think it would be fair to expect an unmitigated disaster, but I'm hopeful that it turns out for the best as I do think the game looks really cool.

 

[DemurOnion]

Yeah I don't understand how people are trying to defend this. It's sad how developers don't seem to think they can tell a story without "cinematic" stuff getting in the way of the actual game.

The only way one can rise to its defense is in the name of art. And so far they are unproven with writing and everything else. I mean, if they give us something like Witcher 2 I'll be satisfied in that it advances the medium ever so slightly in a precious cinematic way. They were using the novelist for inspiration there though, and directly at that. I have no idea what these guys are doing.

 

[hughesta]

As a studio that develops video games, your priority should be in how much the fun your game is to play. Focusing on story and visuals over fun is a great way to make your game a beautiful, interesting slog.

 

[ZeroMaverick]

Of course it's not the actual medium itself that is to blame, just the territory that comes with it. It's the fact that game designers are hired to design videogames, not write terrific scripts. If they want to push storytelling they need to hire the appropriate talent.



I think this can be said about your typical military shooter trying to imitate the large action spectacle of Bay's films, but to be fair to the guy he doesn't actually write any of the scripts that he shoots.

I completely agree. I do believe that it's possible, but it's likely going to be gradual. Even if developers started to hire better writers, there would still be poorly written games.

In the case of RAD and The Order, I wasn't arguing that this game will have the best story on the planet. I just agree with the quote and think that that's the type of thinking that will move games forward.

 

[josecitoxnyo]

So if gameplay is third on the list of priorities and story is first. . . and they've delayed the game . . . does that mean the story sucks right now? Why delay the game for your distant third priority? They're going to "clean up that story in level 6" with the extra few months of dev time?

Because a game like this with little to no replayability will get butchered by games like COD, BF or similars that were coming out almost at the same time. Sony can´t release the game like Infamous vs Titanfall, it would be a massacre sales wise.

The main reason for me is that, the secondary would be the technical aspects of the game, they really want to show off the PS4 power.

 

[TheSlySoul]

I think this can be said about your typical military shooter trying to imitate the large action spectacle of Bay's films, but to be fair to the guy he doesn't actually write any of the scripts that he shoots.

True, but he works with the writers. He likes to portray America as the country that does nothing wrong and is awesome to live in.

I feel bad for AAA gaming though. Bioshock took risks with story, but did not sell enough to make back budget. Last of Us was the odd exception to really work. It seems safer to not focus on the story and deliver a solid MP experience. I applaud The Order for trying something different by making a cinematic SP game.

I'm sure The Order will be good though. Probably just a poorly worded quote.

Probably, they just mean they are not going to let the story get overshadowed by the gameplay. It will probably be on equal footing. Poor word choice gets people in trouble all the time. I think this is another case.