Stories in games, an argument against Yahtzee

[Halo Fanboy]

More Fun To Compute has won the thread so far but I agree with OP here too. There is no intristic worth of storylines over gameplay in fact fiction is merely a collection of lies told by paid liars, their worth is zero (besides entertainment) because they are not real unlike the real competition and challenge you get from a game. Games in fact all have stories to an extent since they have premise (however thin) that usually helps to define and the actions taken player are part of the narrative (which is merely a sequence of events) however what Yahtzee probably meant was how the quality of the story effects the quality of the game in a large way which I disagree with. I think the story doesn't advance the level of immersion beyond a certain point, if the basic storyline is the killer is chasing you, characterising the killer and the player character hardly adds to the immersion since the action performed is the same.

I like good storylines for the same reason as gameplay; entertainment. Games can achieve both along with other things like music and art but the gameplay should always be first because it's ultimately the definining characteristic.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

long post was here

Yeah, just talking about timeless classics isn't that useful. A problem for people who sell games, whether they are sold on story or gameplay, is that a small number of the games sell a lot while the rest just about make ends meet or lose a lot of money.

I'm no business genius, but a lot of the games that do sell well are built around some sort of well loved gameplay. Games like Tetris and Solitaire are fairly easy for anybody to recreate so it is not a good idea to found a large company that specialises in making these games. Civilisation and Mario are hard to recreate and new versions still come out from the original creators that fans of the series do not just see as the same gameplay being rehashed even if it it seems that way to outsiders. Can we honestly say that there are no more games like Super Mario Bros or Civ that can be made and that doing so would be less profitable than making a Half-Life clone with a different story?

I agree that story can give you a motivation to keep on playing as can things like achievement hunting and competition. Just wanting to beat a single player game or get good at it may not be enough for everyone but they are things that people enjoy.

I'm not sure where you are coming from with the Chess doesn't end thing. Chess has very clear rules for starting and ending and people who are into it are very familiar with common sequences for starting and ending a game. If you mean that being replayable in different ways makes it much harder to completely understand it or know when you have mastered it then you are right. There are other games of the same type that you can feel like you are done with and others that are much worse.

 

[wolfy098]

Because Yahtzee comes from Australia, as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them, then we cannot trust Yahtzee's reviews!

Just wait till I get going!

Yahtzee comes from England.
Australia is not populated by criminals
That said I don't like Australia but thats because I hate A/C's

Somebody needs to watch the Princess Bride. ;D

That film is older than I am...
And the storyline it states on wikipedia makes it sound like something a drunk maniac would come up with...

William Goldman is one of the best writers of all time. And it's worth a watch. Seriously. Growing up it was a rite of passage in my household.

Generally writers are insane...
I'm just an example that just because you don't write books it doesn't mean you haven't lost it...

 

[Jekken6]

If you're arguing against Yahtzee, best place would be to do it on the comments section in his latest ZP episode. Reason being, I don't think he reads much of the forums.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

You said gameplay about 5 too many times to be taken seriously.

http://insomnia.ac/commentary/gameplay/

It's a perfectly cromulent word. No need to bust out blogs that some of us would rather have left in our long term memory.

 

[Gildan Bladeborn]

I'm not sure where you are coming from with the Chess doesn't end thing. Chess has very clear rules for starting and ending and people who are into it are very familiar with common sequences for starting and ending a game.

An individual game of chess has a clear starting and ending certainly, what I meant is that you can never reach the 'end' of chess itself, because there isn't one. You can finish reading a book, you can finish Deus Ex, but you can't finish chess, just the current game you're playing. Does that make more sense?

 

[More Fun To Compute]

An individual game of chess has a clear starting and ending certainly, what I meant is that you can never reach the 'end' of chess itself, because there isn't one. You can finish reading a book, you can finish Deus Ex, but you can't finish chess, just the current game you're playing. Does that make more sense?

If that is what I mean by replayablity, then yes. You will probably totally understand tic-tac-toe after a few games then think you are finished with it as you know how to never lose. You can only say you are really finished with Chess if you have a brain the size of a planet (or maybe in the future have a processor the size of a postage stamp). You can say also that you are not finished with Deus Ex and want to try playing differently.

 

[JimJamJahar]

I think that having a great story makes great games even better. The problem with no story means that the only thing keeping you playing the game is novelty value. Eventually the game has no motion, nothing to keep it going and becomes boring. Stories allow the game to change around a bit and immerse you in a world better (or worse) than this one. I absolutely LOVE games that allow you to be part of a story, for your actions to have repurcussions and characters that I can relate to. It makes me feel like the experience is personal to me, and I become part of it's universe.

But really, it all comes down to opinion. There will never be a truly unanimous opinion. I mean, you really need both for a good game. Gamplay and no story gets boring, story and no gameplay feels passive.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

Har har. Obviously I meant that saying 'casual games' calls up mental images of the likes of Peggle - simplistic games developed on a small budget and aimed at demographics that traditionally are not thought of as 'gamers', a description that certainly does not fit a title like Unreal Tournament, squarely aimed at the hardcore shooter fan as it is.

See, that's the problem- when you insist on using words and terms by your own personal definition, rather than the commonly accepted definition, it very much isn't obvious what you mean because nobody knows what your definitions of those words are.

You said gameplay about 5 too many times to be taken seriously.

http://insomnia.ac/commentary/gameplay/

You've just linked to that article one too many times to be taken seriously.

Honestly, the author is a real simpleton if he doesn't understand the fact that some words cover broad concepts rather than specific ideas. You could say the same thing about the word 'story'. What about the story are you talking about? The plot? The setting? The characters?

Somebody also might want to tell him about words like 'drumbeat' and 'screenplay'.

 

[CaptainLoser]

I think that you forget that some games are designed specifically to tell stories, and some are designed specifically for gameplay. Basically, it breaks down into multiplayer games (Like Counter-Strike, Team Fortress, etc. which require no story) and single player games (Mass Effect, Half-Life, etc. in which the story element is crucial) with a few exceptions such as Battlefield: 1942 (which admittedly already had a deeply rich back story, since it's based off of real history) and Civilizations (this game really has no need for a story, because since the game starts at the beginning of time, you're making your own history).

For me, I have no interest to play a single player game if I have no idea why I'm doing the things I'm doing (A good example is Farcry 2). If a multiplayer game doesn't play well, it won't hold my attention for long.

 

[funguy2121]

ad nauseum snip

Sorry, I tuned out after "doesn't represent the everyman." Don't you feel that the everyman is overrated? He is, after all, only average, hardly an expert. I'm not being cute. The everyman is an archetype I think we need to evolve past, and I'm not suggesting we go into the objectivist "superman" territory, either.

What's so great about being average? Why do so many people want any one of critical or artistic merit to market themselves to the lowest common denominator?

It's blase. It's boring. If I want a different point of view, I'll seek out a critic whom I know disagrees with me with great regularity. If I want a reliable point of view, I'll seek out one who seems to share my tastes. If I want a unique point of view, I'll seek out Ben Crowshaw (yeah, I'm lazy and I misspelled his name).

Fuggit - it's Rex Manning Day!

Yes, you will be rewarded with a cookie upon the reference.

 

[enzilewulf]

Well he is a critic. He is suppost to put his Personal insight on it, Duh your just boring if you view for the masses. Because the you would be saying MW2 ROCKS STILL! every freaking week. Also why are you really caring about him this much to point out all this? So your proving?.. anyways Stories I think are a good thing to use in gaming because you can't just go around sensly killin with out a purpose *okay WoW is an exception because yes you can make your own stores and I really don't see anything bad for that but then you get into Role Playing and I don't trully like that, but thats me.* I love making my own stories but still I like when i Know what side im on and why im doing what it is that i'm doing. It sets a goal for you and it make me feel good when I acomplish it. Then again this is only me.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Snip!

So basically, you're saying that as long as the gameplay is solid, the story could stink, and the game will still be good. And I'm not saying that's not true. But the game won't be great. Not by today's standards. Yes, there were game in the past that were great despite having little or no story, and they will alwayswill be remembered as great. BUT, you can't claim that is the saem game was made today, it would receive as much attention, or praise.

My assertion, quite simply, is that an excellent story is all well and good but if I have to suffer (because of poor gameplay) I almost certainly won't see it through to the end. On the other hand, if a game has a terrible story (or no story) but enjoyable mechanics I generally am willing to carry on playing to the end.

Competence of execution is far more important in video games than other media. You can watch any number of indy films and have a good time even though they show all the signs of amature work. The trouble is, an indy film that has poor lighting or camera work (for example) will, at most, chew up a few hours of my life whereas a game will have me sit and suffer through poor mechanics for substantially longer.

Final Fantasy demonstrates this wonderfully. I can never bring myself to finish any of the main titles in the series. I simply do not enjoy the underlying mechancs enough to struggle through 60+ hours of it to find out how the whole thing wraps up. On the other hand, Final Fantasy Tactics presents a much less epic and far less compelling tale and yet I managed to make it through to the end simply because I enjoyed the core mechanics enough to see it through.

As I said previously, if games regularly presented stories that can stand on their own merit, I would almost certanly believe story is equally important to mechanics. Until that day arrives, most of my enjoyment of games will come from the actual play portion of the game, not the story.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

If I was talking about the plot I would have said I was talking about the plot, and not the story.

That's some pretty hardcore missing the point you're doing there. A 'story' is just as much a collection of elements as 'gameplay' is. If you don't think 'gameplay' should be a word, then logically you should think that 'story' shouldn't...

Wait, do you actually understand the point that the article you linked was trying to make in the first place?

Doesn't "gameplay" frustrate you at all?

No, and I don't think it frustrates anybody else who isn't faking being an intellectual.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

I just wish people would elaborate on what they mean by "gameplay".

Game play describes the act of playing a game and game mechanics acting in a way to facilitate a good game playing experience. If people say that a game has good gameplay with no explanation then you might try asking them why.

 

[JediMB]

a very complicated casual game

That's a paradox.

EDIT:
Perhaps I should add that I don't believe there is such a thing as a casual game. Sure, one might play a casual game of -insert title here-, but that doesn't make the title itself a casual game by nature.

But then I also think that the term "casual gamer" is horrendously misused, being applied to people simply because they don't have as much experience with games, or because they don't have as much time for them.