Gaming Literature: Do you partake?

[BQE]

Recently, I've been getting more and more into the novels that are based on the games I enjoy. In the case of Blizzard's books, I've found that flesh out the universes in a way that seems far too difficult or complex for the games themselves (MMOs particularly).

After reading some, I did some searches and found a serioous dichotomy in the stance of supporting these novels or not. Some folks believe that all important lore should take place in games, rather than making the reading 'mandatory' in a sense. Others, have no problem with it and love reading the books in order to add some more dimensions to the games they play.

I know there's been everything from Dragon Age books to Gears of War and wide array in between. As far as I understand, these were games first and then became expanded upon by literature and the like. However, in the case of Star Wars and Warhammer 40k these universes existed in other forms, before they were adapted into video games.

This made me curious to hear your thoughts. Do you prefer a game to exist before it's expanded lore? Or is taking a franchise or series of books/movies and turning them into games the better way to go? Do you read the literature at all, or even look into the extra lore in-game or on websites?

 

[Shoggoth2588]

It all depends on the games they books are based off of and, who the author is. I'm interested in some of the graphic novels and have indeed, read...at least one (the free New Vegas one if you got the Collector's Edition) but when it comes to actual book-books, I've read the three Halo books that came out before the game Reach (I think), the Mass Effect trilogy and, while they probably don't count as they aren't DIRECTLY based off of a single book, the Darth Bane trilogy (ya know...Knights of the Old Republic)

I read another Star Wars book Death Troopers which isn't based off of any game but it felt very, very Dead Space-like.

 

[VanQ]

To answer the question in the thread title, I've read quite a few WarCraft books in my time. Regardless of what people say about the WarCraft story, I enjoy it and the lore immensely. It's one of the reasons I'm still playing WoW after all these years.

Looking at my bookshelf, other IPs I own novels for
-StarCraft
-Guild Wars
-Warhammer
-Perfect Dark
-The iDOLM@STER
-Halo


To answer the question in the OP, I prefer for a game to exist before the world is expanded upon personally. I feel like games where novels/movies/etc existed before hand tend to end up a bit lacking in the imagination department due to being limited to the lore that already exists. Whereas games that started it all seem to continue to introduce new things never seen before that often get expanded upon later in things like novels, etc.

It's not uncommon for a rights holder of the original source material to set limits on the developers to make sure the finished product resembles the original content enough that they can exert copyright over that without risk. Whereas if the developer is working with their own IP and simply expanding outwards, they have a lot more freedom to bring their vision to life as a game. Rather than a game based off a book/etc.

 

[Zhukov]

Nope.

I guess I'm something of a literature snob at heart because I find the notion of books based on video games being any good to be kind of ridiculous, if for no other reason than that any truly good authors are going to be off doing their own thing rather than writing glorified fanfiction.

 

[Vegosiux]

Nope.

I guess I'm something of a literature snob at heart because I find the notion of books based on video games being any good to be kind of ridiculous, if for no other reason than that any truly good authors are going to be off doing their own thing rather than writing glorified fanfiction.

You're just so snarky. I like it. In fact, I'm letting you into my exclusive snarky club. Wait, no I can't do that, I don't have such a club. Another day maybe.

But I generally agree with you here. And I'm often quite annoyed if, Elune forbid, the literature part becomes part of game canon. Ugh. I hate that.

 

[MysticSlayer]

I don't see a problem with it, but I have no intention of ever reading video-game based books. Maybe there are some good books out there, but from my experience:

1. Translating one form of media into another form hardly works out. You will always prefer what you experienced first, sometimes to the point of hating the other forms.
2. Fan fiction, which is all these books are, is generally really, really, really bad.

For that reason, I do not wish to spend time or money on these books. Well, unless a novelist I respect recommends it. Even then, I'm still not likely to buy it over other stuff.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

No. I don't like novelizations. I find them shallow and fanfiction-y. Especially when adapting from a predominantly visual medium like a movie or a videogame. I cringe at the way the prose is trying to replicate the "cinematography" in the original thing, it feels so prosaic.

 

[TheRiddler]

I remember liking the prequel novel to Bioshock. It was interesting to get a more extensive look at Rapture's collapse, though I'll be the first to admit that I still preferred the game's method of giving the player small pieces of what the place used to be.

 

[Evonisia]

I'd prefer the game series to be able to stand up on it's own before bringing in the books. Halo: Reach and Halo 4 both require you to read through about 4 books each to understand the context of the game. Haven read 8 of the 20 or so books I can say that being able to understand a lot of what's going on in the games because of the books is quite aggravating.

Warcraft is very bad for this, too. Half of the lore (and the vast majority of the Alliance lore) comes from novels set during the time it happened, rather than in the game itself. In the game itself Dalaran is still a neutral city even after the event you go through.

 

[octafish]

No. But I do try and support any printed game journalism that covers PC.

 

[BQE]

Warcraft is very bad for this, too. Half of the lore (and the vast majority of the Alliance lore) comes from novels set during the time it happened, rather than in the game itself. In the game itself Dalaran is still a neutral city even after the event you go through.

Yes, a great point. I found the fact that the game seems to omit so many details indicated by the lore, but use the aftereffects of pivotal events covered in the books seems bizarre to me.

There's been grumbling on the Blizzard forums in regard to the upcoming trial of Garrosh book coming out. Folks say they will be upset if that's the only serious attention that event gets.

 

[TheSYLOH]

It varies in quality. But I do partake quite frequently.
I especially like the Warhammer 40k books by Dan Abnett.
Though I have read some of the StarCraft novels/graphic novels.
I even enjoyed the Crysis 2 novelization, gave the game some introspection and alternative viewpoints on the situation.
That being said, I read a Halo novelization and it was CRAP. Also the non-Dan Abnett Warhammer stuff is very hit or miss. The nadir was probably some lame Deathwatch novel.
As for MMO novels I read 3 of the EVE Online novels(think that may be all of them, but I've been out of EVE for a while), The first one was good, the second was SHIT( because it was just a discount package tour of the EVE universe) and the third one was OK.
By and large though they are all pretty light and fluffy reading, nothing deep or profound, but entertaining none-the-less.

 

[Jandau]

Depends. I'm not really a fan of novelizations, be it games or movies. However, I do enjoy Expanded Universe. When I was younger I ate up Forgotten Realms books. Nowdays, I like the occasional Warhammer novel. I'd argue that some of them are genuinely good, regardless of setting. Novels like Ciaphas Cain and Eisenhorn are just outright solid reads.

 

[putowtin]

I've read the Assassin's Creed books, Oliver Bowden is no author, and there's too many inconsistances to the games, (Ezio's scar for example)

The Dragon Age books on the other hand are enjoyable and add to the lore of Thedas

 

[Dandark]

I have read and enjoyed some gaming novels before. Back when I was a huge Halo fan I owned and enjoyed the first 6 books and reread them every now and then. However I stopped enjoying Halo that much after Halo: Reach and haven't even looked at any of the newer books, the last one I read was the Cole protocol, the last main story one I read was the ghosts of Onyx which I really enjoyed but I don't like what they did with the lore.

It pains me to see what happened to Halo, I couldn't even bring myself to finish the campaign for Halo 4.

I also enjoyed some of the 40K books, I don't always like them that much but I've taken a few out of the local library and enjoyed some of them well enough. I think the one I remember really liking was Iron snakes or something like that.


I like gaming literature and think it's a great way to expand the lore and universe for fans who really enjoy a certain game but I hate it when they become required reading to understand what is going on in the game. Halo 4 and Gears of war 3 did this and I hated it, especially Gears of war 3.

 

[sXeth]

I haven't really read any of them, but I'd assume it varies as wildly as any other mass-franchised fiction. Someone above mentioned Forgotten Realms novels, which really run the gamut from standards of the fantasy genre, to decent, to shoddy retellings of someones generic D&D session and almost Harlequin esque recycled plots.

 

[BQE]

I especially like the Warhammer 40k books by Dan Abnett.
Though I have read some of the StarCraft novels/graphic novels.
I even enjoyed the Crysis 2 novelization, gave the game some introspection and alternative viewpoints on the situation.
That being said, I read a Halo novelization and it was CRAP. Also the non-Dan Abnett Warhammer stuff is very hit or miss. The nadir was probably some lame Deathwatch novel.

I agree with you on Mr. Abnett, I've found that Graham McNeill is also a very notable author for Black Library as well. I've enjoyed the 40k literature more often than not, and I'm glad to read to them.

Depends. I'm not really a fan of novelizations, be it games or movies. However, I do enjoy Expanded Universe. When I was younger I ate up Forgotten Realms books. Nowdays, I like the occasional Warhammer novel. I'd argue that some of them are genuinely good, regardless of setting. Novels like Ciaphas Cain and Eisenhorn are just outright solid reads.

I've recently started the Eisenhorn vs Ravenor Pariah trilogy and I would heartily recommend that you both look into it. Only the first book has been released so far but it was quite a good read in my opinion.

 

[AntiChrist]

I came in here expecting this thread to be about non-fiction literature like this [http://books.google.dk/books/about/Rise_of_the_Videogame_Zinesters.html?id=nc3GRXqgPZ8C&redir_esc=y] or this [http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3385050-game-feel]. Oh well...

The only adaptation of a game I've read is Mass Effect: Ascension. It was... serviceable... I guess?

 

[Smooth Operator]

Not directly, but some stories do make their way into game form so I guess it counts in the end. Mostly that comes down to Warhammer stuff, although not that many games are made and even less pick up a good story.

And I'm not very fond of parallel book / game production because it happened time and again that parts will be purposefully left out in one piece so you would go buy the other... write the entire damn story or fuck off.