Do games, NEED story?

[Treblaine]

Do pizzas need toppings?

Not really, but unless the meat's rancid and the veg is looking kind of wrinkling, you're better with than without.

(Yes, I'm hungry)

I don't know, A pizza is DEFINED by topping. Without topping all you have is flatbread, which is not called pizza it's called flatbread.

There have been so many highly lauded games without such insignificant smattering of plot it's like a little bit of garlic cheese on your flatbread, sorry but that's still not a pizza it's garlic bread.

Quake (especially multiplayer), Unreal Tournament, Team Fortress, Minecraft, Doom, Pong,

Having a "plot" with regular character development and plot twists is not a definitive part of games but that's not to say they don't have a narrative.

See I've had experiences in Minecraft that would count as stories, I remember on time I got lost in the mountains for the (minecraft) days. Got completely turned around and had no idea which way was home, the more I walked and the more turns I made the more deeply I was lost. It was quite disconcerting, I suddenly had to start from scratch, digging a hole in the ground to survive the nights and running from various monsters and creepers. I eventually found myself looking down a massive precipice into a huge river or lake below. I leaped into the water and found it was a long expanse of water.

Finally, I had a way home. I knew I couldn't survive back over the mountains, I fashioned a raft and floated down the river. So long I followed the river till finally I reached open water. I remember I had built my house near the beach and kept paddling along in my raft till I reached the beach. as I ran ashore more and more seemed familiar till I finally saw my house.

I'd made it home.

This is a story but Minecraft "has no plot". The story emerged from the gameplay. And this experience affected me more than most of the films I'd seen that year, it was my own (virtual) experience of survival, the feeling of being lost and then rescuing yourself. That was something special.

You may not care about this story because I'm not a very good writer, but it affected me. And this illustrates the emotive power of games that don't have "a plot".

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

All visual media tells a story.

Now a narrative... That's completely different.

No, not all games require narrative in order to create the desired experience for the player.

 

[CityofTreez]

Need? No, but in 99% of cases in makes the game better.

 

[CleverNickname]

Games don't NEED story. There is a million great games that don't really tell a story. TF2 exists (the comics don't count). Future games don't all need stories, and there will be games like that.

What bothers me a little with this particular question is the kind of answer that goes "of course, Game X would be terrible without the story!"
No, it wouldn't be. Game X wouldn't be Game X, it would be Game Y, that plays exactly (?) like Game X. You really can't argue in favour of something by citing an example that already exists with, in this case, a story, and then say "know that one? that would suck!"

Actually, Mass Effect could make for a pretty good game even without its story. Relatively good. Objectively, cuz I don't like them much anymore.
Think pure stage progression like in old beat'em-ups, where you went from New York to Paris to Shanghai for absolutely no damn reason. But in space.

... Games should do that again occasionally. Just randomly throw you interesting places for the hell of it, no explanation.

See, that's the thing. Instead of getting so hung up on great narratives (and frankly, this is videogame stories we're talking about...), why not try to think up how to improve gameplay with the other bajillion (or 17) tools developers have at their disposal? This isn't movies, and it's not 1985. Games can do ANYTHING.
Instead they warm up 12 year old concepts and put it in a different desert.

 

[MidnightSt]

Depends on your definition of a "story".
If "story" means a narrative arc in any form suitable for the specific game ( = not necessarily verbal) encapsulating the game's events, whatever they might be, creating a beginning, middle and an end, evolution of the idea, then YES.

If by "story" you mean "words/videos describing events that are supposedly happening between the segments you can actually play, or even during the segments that you actually play, but you don't participate in the events, because the game mechanics is not capable of allowing you to do them", then no. Well, some of them do, but this is not really necessary for games in general, where the first definition is universally necessary for any medium that wants to carry some meaning.

 

[Smeatza]

No, they don't need a story. No form of entertainment or art NEEDS a story.

 

[CleverNickname]

Damn... it is really obvious that you haven't played a single video game this generation or even last gen. Really really obvious.

... yeah, that must be it. I haven't played a game since 1995, clearly.

That statement (but also all the others) makes something really really obvious about you, too.

Which is why this is where this post ends.

 

[burningdragoon]

No. But really it depends on what you mean by "story"... and by "need" I guess.

But really, the only thing a video game "needs" is input controls and resulting effects. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a video game.

 

[Skratt]

As stated before, it depends on the game.

Mario - the princess has been kidnapped and you have to collect X of Y before you can reach the final boss works. It is simple, gives a basic contextual motivation for running around random places as opposed to just racing straight to bowser.

Portal - could have been a basic puzzle game that people would have enjoyed but was actually made fantastic by giving the game a story.

Trine - Story is loosely required.

Mass Effect - The story is the game.

Half-Life - The story is the game.

Bejeweled - any game that is like this with a story behind it actually detracts from the game. Those stupid monster battle adventure games where the fight is a bejeweled game are retarded.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

So let me give you a couple of questions, would you be ok with a devloper saying "I'm going to make a game with no story because I want to focus on the gameplay?" Would you play said game? What would you look for in said game?

If it looked interesting, sure, I'd give it a shot. But I wouldn't expect it to hold my interest for very long, so I'd likely wait for it to drop down to bargain-bin prices.

But in most cases, I'm inclined to say that a game does need a story. I find that a story and cast of characters are what give me motivation to actually play the game. I know that there are many people out there who are perfectly content with games where the purpose of playing is absolutely nothing more than trying to get the most points (or what-have-you)... but that just really doesn't do much for me.

PacMan and Tetris are damn fun and have solid gameplay, but I can guarantee I've put far fewer hours into them than Deus Ex, which I've replayed close to a dozen times.

 

[Gottesstrafe]

No, they do not. Stories are entirely superfluous, like music, voice acting, and cut scenes. They might contribute considerably to your game play experience and make the game more memorable, but they aren't actually necessary to make a game. It's one of the reasons why I shake my head when people on this forum rant extensively on how a great story makes up for crap game play, or how story should always have priority over game play. No. Just... no. Game play and interactivity is what makes video games unique among other forms of media like movies and books. No matter how good a game's story and characters are, and no matter how invested in them you are, if there's little to no interactivity or input on your part then there's no stakes. Nothing that happens in the game can be reflective of you or your actions. A great game makes good use of story, game play elements, and the other set dressings. A game with good game play that has little to no story can still be a good game. A game with a good story and is light on game play is an interactive movie. A game with a good story and no game play is a book.

For the record, by story I mean plot, narrative, characterization, and etc. A little context on what you are doing, the rules of your game world, and how your actions affect what's going on in the game are necessary, otherwise you'd just be playing a game of calvin ball.

 

[Hyperone]

Do games all by default need stories? If that is the question than I would say no. While it is an integral part of gaming as a culture, there are plenty of games that are hailed as classics that amount to "someone stole something from you, now get it back".

 

[hondommond]

The downloadable game Journey doesn't necessarily have a story. The gameplay itself is what creates a story for the player.

One could argue that it does have signs of a story, but I feel that it could not stand alone without the solid gameplay and the emotional attachment that players create to the characters through gameplay.

So yeah even though my example isn't the greatest; I think games could stand out even though they didn't have a story. In what ways they would stand out would be an interesting thing to see!

 

[Auninteligentname]

I'll say no. A game don't need a story to work. Just look at Tetris and Pong and Pacman. A game with a story, doesn't need a complicated story to work, either, just look at Mario.

However, the more complicated a story gets (or if they put a lot of emphasis on the story), the more the game will be hated, if this story isn't good/enjoyable.

This should go without saying, but 'tis is just my opinion.

 

[ScrabbitRabbit]

In the very loosest sense, most genres intrinsically have stories. In Sonic The Hedgehog or Super Mario Brothers, the story is you getting from A to B, in Minecraft the story is whatever the fuck happens to occur in your playtime.

But, like I said, this is in the loosest sense of the word and is far from what people mean when they say "story."

A story in the sense of a real, cohesive (hopefully) narrative with actual characters who have motivations, a definite beginning, middle and end? No, games don't need that. It can make a good game great and a great game a classic, but it isn't needed. And some games are even ruined by their story (I will never forgive Max Payne 3).

There are some amazing games, both from now and from days gone by that managed to engross and entertain us without having to tell us a story. How many people love Torchlight despite it's bare minimum storytelling? Super Meat Boy? Any competitive multiplayer mode, ever?

Games can even be quite moving, thoughtful and "artistic" without a story. Journey has already been mentioned so let's go with that, first. In Journey, it's the aesthetics and the mechanics that have made the game the beautiful cult classic that it is, the "story" is just some context that even the likes of Super Meat Boy or Worms would give you.

NiGHTS was the same way. Yeah it had some "gamey" aspects like scores and shit (understandable since it is, y'know, a game) but the free flowing movement, the music, the art, it all creates this unforgettable experience that can only be described as bliss. There are so many games that manage to be thought provoking or moving without needing to tell you a "story." If, one day, we ever do reach the point where games need a story, it will be a sad day indeed. All we'd be doing is unnecessarily restricting the medium, preventing it from exploring the other myriad artistic possibilities in the medium and preventing us from getting fun, time-killing entertainment uninterrupted by exposition.

My favourite games are all pretty story-heavy, but I never want to see storyless games go away.

 

[Lt._nefarious]

That would be like taking the crazy out of Nicolas Cage... Sure he'd still be a decent actor but he wouldn't scream the alphabet, eat pigeons or run around shouting "I'm a vampire!" and everything would probably be just a bit worse of in the long run...

Kinda worse of and dull

Spoiler

Good

Spoiler