Poll: Can story save a bad game?

[lacktheknack]

Yes, it can.

I would call DEFCON a "bad game", because it's short, repetitive and has less strategy to it than your might think. It's pretty shallow, and it wouldn't be worth mentioning...

...until you're actually playing it. Suddenly, you feel trapped in an underground bunker as you watch the whole world just go POP. Weeping woman included. It's a horrible and fantastic experience.

Sometimes, context is everything.

 

[lacktheknack]

Well it really depends on context.

For example, Fallout 3 versus Fallout: New Vegas. But for the purpose of this example we'll just have to imagine Fallout: New Vegas didn't make a rediculous amount of improvments to the gameplay, and combat, stealth, etc are the same.

In Fallout 3, all the characters are unlikable, the atmosphere is non-existant, the story is full of plot hole, and despite being so far away from the west coast, they STILL manage to rape the lore. And that's not even getting into the "gameplay".


In Fallout: New Vegas, without the gameplay improvements, the game is still much better because writing is so much better, especially because in an RPG, story IS a gameplay element.

That said, in truly bad game the story won't save the gameplay at all. Not to mention story certainly does make a game more enjoyable. Again, see Fallout 3, it's horrible plot holes, lack of anywhere to explore (no, copy-pasting the metro does NOT count), fucking grating characters, non-existant atmosphere, etc. Because quite frankly, the game is bad, and like other truly bad games, in addition to bugs, crashes, and bad designs decisions, is Twilight-like writing (complete with fucking vampires), reused antagonists, boring story, and unlikable characters.

Generally, if you have to repeat your arguments two or three times, you don't have much of an argument in the first place.

And "non-existent atmosphere"? Uh, wat? I MUCH preferred the atmosphere of Fallout 3 over what I played of Fallout: New Vegas.

 

[lord.jeff]

As long as the game is playable a story can save but there is a point when gameplay can be so terrible that no story could make the torture of playing worth it and that's when I go to youtube.

I dont care about mainly story games because the gameplay tends to be dull.


Prime example: Dragon Age. FUCK YOU.

I enjoyed playing all the openings for the different class/races but after that the game had no appeal to me story or gameplay wise.

There's really no point in playing a point and click adventure for anything but the story unless your idea of a good game is clicking stuff.

Or you enjoy puzzles. Any genre could be described as click stuff or press buttons.

 

[DementedSheep]

How bad are we talking here? bad gameplay will stop it from being a truly good game but it can be worth playing and memorable for the story alone just so long as the game play isn?t too painful. If its just boring a good story can make up for it some extent. If it?s frustrating and full of bugs it probably won't.

 

[HalfTangible]

How bad is the game play that we're talking about here? A game that's utterly unplayable will be impossible to enjoy in any case - a game that's just MOSTLY unplayable will probably have a chance but still no. But JRPGs have proven pretty well that you can have BORING gameplay with a good story and get it to work.

 

[Domogo]

in anything and everything enough good always makes up for less bad (in some cases however the amount of good is unreasonable)

 

[Verex]

The story is what draws me into the game anyways. Terrible graphics or bad voice acting? Meh. A bland storyline is what turns me off. That's one reason I can't stand playing COD in single player mode.

 

[Raggedstar]

I think we all can agree that if story can save gameplay, the gameplay (or something else in the game) has to make some sort of effort to be engaging. I mean, otherwise what's stopping you from watching an LP, reading a wiki, or watching cutscenes?

Someone mentioned Psychonauts earlier, and that's one of the best examples I can think of. The platforming is average at best, but it's the storytelling, level design, creativity, Double Fine's blood and sweat etc, that made it so good. I also like the sweeping story of FF7 (I don't care how cliche it is *retreats to corner*) and the gameplay and graphics have aged so terribly.

Though perhaps the best example I can think of is Silent Hill 2. I know a lot of people claim that the shitty gameplay, controls, and camera are supposed to invoke a feeling of helplessness. With me and games like that, it doesn't make me feel helpless. More like angry, maybe even ill with such bad camera work. Not to mention I hate backwards-ass adventure game logic no matter what game it's in. But when I retreat to a Youtube page or wiki, I fawn over the story, symbols, and stuff like that. On the gameplay side, at least the game has some wicked creepy atmosphere.

Drakengard on the other hand, well you have some mildly interesting story told through blocks of text in between about 45 minutes of mashing square to grimey, uninteresting landscapes cutting through stupid cookie-cutter enemies. I keep getting told that the game's story will be worth it in the long run, but then again she loves FF13 lol. I'm sorry, but 6 hours of not having fun isn't worth gawking at the wtf factor of flying demon babies.

 

[Midnight Crossroads]

As long as the game is playable a story can save but there is a point when gameplay can be so terrible that no story could make the torture of playing worth it and that's when I go to youtube.

I dont care about mainly story games because the gameplay tends to be dull.


Prime example: Dragon Age. FUCK YOU.

I enjoyed playing all the openings for the different class/races but after that the game had no appeal to me story or gameplay wise.

There's really no point in playing a point and click adventure for anything but the story unless your idea of a good game is clicking stuff.

Or you enjoy puzzles. Any genre could be described as click stuff or press buttons.

Yes, but few genres are so heavily vested in clicking as the point and click adventure.

 

[Nazulu]

Like usual, the OP never goes into detail whats bad about the game. Don't mean to sound rude, but it's true.

I've never seen a great story in a game, just some that are really eventful. So for arguments sake, lets say this made up game has a great story with basic FPS game play where the weapons are very limited and can be really glitchy every now and again. I would say yes, I could definitely endure that.

Now lets say this game with a great story and basic FPS game play lagged a lot, or quit you out of the game often, and it was really bloody difficult because of poor controls, and the sound quality and music is shite. No effing way! I would would rather just read about it or find someone on Youtube that turned it into a movie.

So my answer, depends how bad were talking here.

 

[Okulossos]

I consider a bad game to have bad gameplay, broken controls and the likes. So no, if a game is that broken not the best story in the world can save it.
BUT a really good story can make up for "not so good" controls/gameplay - as long as they/it work/s properly.

 

[xshadowscreamx]

the interesting story to NIER got me though the average environments/grinding.

 

[Something Amyss]

I think RDR is fairly awful mechanically, but I like the story and atmosphere.

 

[Rodrigo Girao]

Max Payne is a good example of excellent writing (plus graphics and voice acting) compensating some rather flawed gameplay.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

No way. If it is an amazing story then I might watch it on Youtube but would never consider it a game without at least decent gameplay. Games are about gameplay, stories are nice but they are not the core of it.
Would you read a choose your own adventure book if the story was bad?

 

[Ghonesis]

You need both for a successful game. There's variations though:
JRPG's generally don't have great gameplay, but it's bearable. And they make up for it with exciting stories.
FPS's, on the other hand, focus a lot on gameplay. Their stories are thus mostly generic. Same goes for RTS, in my opinion.

But having unbearable gameplay just kills a game no matter how good the story is. Same goes the other way around: games without a storyline, goal or anything are boring. This goes for most genre's except open-world sandboxes.. now that I think about it. (MineCraft, GTA)

 

[uhddh]

If the game is playable. Then the story is what pushes me through. If it's a control scheme that requires you to have ten thumbs to play then I'll just watch the story on youtube if it's good.

 

[MorganL4]

Alpha Protocol.

Perfect example.... What got me through it was the way the roleplay/story elements keep you interested, despite the horrid controls.