The Division 2?s story: Does it need to send a message?

[hanselthecaretaker]

And if so, how and what exactly would that message be in order to keep sales up and political shitstorms down?

I was reading Gamesradar?s review [https://www.gamesradar.com/the-division-2-review/] and the following paragraph stood out:

But for all the glorious settings, and genuinely stunning open world (if you can call a post-pandemic wasteland of a city pretty), it's a bit of a shame that the plot is such a disappointment. Aside from taking back control of the city and various interactions with some side characters, there isn't really much of a story to speak of at all. For a game whose marketing paints its political commentary as its main draw, and a city that's been ravaged both by disease as well as rioting and combat, none of its backstory is ever explored properly. It manages to weave a line where it says absolutely nothing of politics, despite a mission where you fight through a museum exhibit on the Vietnam War, or have to go and rescue the Declaration of Independence. There are some interesting statements in the comms you can find and in some of the things you'll find littered about the world, but The Division 2?s story is obviously trying to play it safe. And in the end it fails to resonate. It basically ends up being a game about who's got the best guns and gear.

It kinda sounds like they?re fishing for something that is bound to be controversial. The implication there is, how far would they need to take a narrative in order for it to resonate, and what kind of narrative would that need to be to do so?

Games are not books or movies, or even TV. They are products first, and very expensive ones to make. Another key aspect of games is they are primarily meant to be played first, which would leave story aspects of a peripheral or supporting nature at best. The other thing is do people really even care about stories in games yet? Most of the time the general consensus is they don?t hold a candle to even average movies, let alone modern TV. Will that ever be an objective possibility, even with the most optimistic mindset?

Even if they did, would it really be unequivocally a good thing? I think with a game like this for example it could greatly interfere with the fun to be had from playing it if the story was too heavy-handed with controversial content or agendas. In a way it could be considered the nature of the beast medium.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

err, you're saying games shouldn't be considered and interpreted as an art-form now? want them to be taken seriously? then take the various criticism that comes with being taken seriously

am in most agreement with Paddy off a recent podcast on this one in that it comes off way more like a tongue-in-cheek narrative by a Canadian-based developer laughing at America's typical self-aggrandising "way"

 

[Canadamus Prime]

They are products first, and very expensive ones to make..

That is an extremely depressing and disheartening thought.

Also I would say that video games have to potential to tell a story in a way that movies, books, and TV cannot possibly compete with. The key word there being potential. This potential could be achieved if more effort was put into the storytelling aspect of it. Games are an interactive medium and thus can truly draw the audience into whatever story the creator wants to tell. With that in mind, why can't they have a message?
Of course if games are just supposed to be products, I guess none of that matters.

 

[CaitSeith]

The Division 2's story: Does it need to send a message?

Did the Mass Effect 3 ending need to be determined by something more than just an A, B, C choice?

For a game whose marketing paints its political commentary as its main draw, and a city that's been ravaged both by disease as well as rioting and combat, none of its backstory is ever explored properly.

Same case. It isn't necessary; the lack of it just makes it lamer and skips the selling point presented by the publicity.

 

[CaitSeith]

They are products first, and very expensive ones to make..

That is an extremely depressing and disheartening thought.

Also I would say that video games have to potential to tell a story in a way that movies, books, and TV cannot possibly compete with. The key word there being potential. This potential could be achieved if more effort was put into the storytelling aspect of it. Games are an interactive medium and thus can truly draw the audience into whatever story the creator wants to tell. With that in mind, why can't they have a message?
Of course if games are just supposed to be products, I guess none of that matters.

Also, movies, books and TV content are products too. So that's a lame excuse.

 

[Hawki]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAxXqJVtuh4

I'm not fond of Sterling's style, but this is a case where I think he sums up a lot of things nicely when it comes to art and politics.

Still, in regards to the argument:

The Division 2?s story: Does it need to send a message?

Well, I'll come out and say that I don't think any piece of fiction "needs" to send a message. That said:

Games are not books or movies, or even TV. They are products first, and very expensive ones to make.

That isn't a sound argument. The argument of something being a product could be applied to any art form.

Games are expensive to make. You know what else is expensive? Movies and theatre, among other things. By that logic, none of these things should ever try to be more than a product.

Another key aspect of games is they are primarily meant to be played first, which would leave story aspects of a peripheral or supporting nature at best.

Being played and having a focus on story isn't mutually exclusive. There's plenty of games where story is front and centre.

The other thing is do people really even care about stories in games yet?

They have for decades.

Most of the time the general consensus is they don't hold a candle to even average movies, let alone modern TV.

I can't comment on "general consensus," but the way I see it, Sturgeon's Law applies across all media. So, no, there's no VG equivalent of Citizen Kane, but there's plenty of games that are above Plan 9 from Outer Space.

Even if they did, would it really be unequivocally a good thing?

How could better stories in any medium be considered a bad thing?

I think with a game like this for example it could greatly interfere with the fun to be had from playing it if the story was too heavy-handed with controversial content or agendas.

The Division 2 bears the Tom Clancy namesake, a man who wrote political thrillers. It has a setting where a secret group has carte blanche to defend the US from looters/terrorists, in a situation that stems from a virus that spread on Black Friday (consumerism), that apparently sent the country to a pre-industrial state, where, among other things, those that owned firearms did better than those who didn't (gun rights). This also being a setting with factions like the "True Sons," and a three way civil war within the country.

The Division by its nature is controversial, or at least, dipping into material that is. Whether it's trying to say anything or not is another matter, but it's chosen its subject matter, and like any piece of art, it can be analyzed in the context of said subject matter, and how it presents it. To say otherwise is basically a case of special pleading.

This isn't even new. Extra Credits did a video on the first Division in a similar manner.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jKsj345Jjw

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

When you try to make something for everyone, you make nothing for no one. You should make anything for someone/some group and try to make it so good or tweak it a bit that it pulls in a bigger audience. Every publisher wants every game to make all the money and that is the cause for pretty much everything wrong with video gaming. Like when survival horror wasn't commercial enough for AAA to bother with. Sure, The Division 2 will probably be more successful than say Shadow of the Colossus but it won't resonate with anyone either, there won't be videos 10 years from now talking about the game. Just go back to last-gen Ubisoft and the 1st 2 Assassin's Creed games, they took a stand and lost some people, but I'll remember what they were going for. Whereas, Watch Dogs, I ain't gonna remember shit about that narrative-wise outside of just plain being super generic. The reason I love Watchmen so much is because the core message of it is basically an indictment of the human race. Also, the whole point of a narrative is deliver themes/messages to the audience. If a game wants to send no message whatsoever, don't have a narrative then, which is an avenue that games can go.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAxXqJVtuh4

I'm not fond of Sterling's style, but this is a case where I think he sums up a lot of things nicely when it comes to art and politics.

Beat me to it. I agree with Jim that it's impossible to make something that doesn't have some political message. There's nothing wrong with political messages and it's become like a "bad" word like how "linear" or "cutscenes" became a bad word in gaming for really no reason.

 

[Hawki]

Also, the whole point of a narrative is deliver themes/messages to the audience. If a game wants to send no message whatsoever, don't have a narrative then, which is an avenue that games can go.

Disagree with that. You can easily have a narrative without any themes. Themes will certainly elevate the narrative (at least if handled well), but a narrative can be good, even engaging, without any deeper meaning behind it.

 

[Hades]

And if so, how and what exactly would that message be in order to keep sales up and political shitstorms down?

I was reading Gamesradar?s review [https://www.gamesradar.com/the-division-2-review/] and the following paragraph stood out:



Games are not books or movies, or even TV. They are products first, and very expensive ones to make. Another key aspect of games is they are primarily meant to be played first, which would leave story aspects of a peripheral or supporting nature at best. The other thing is do people really even care about stories in games yet? Most of the time the general consensus is they don?t hold a candle to even average movies, let alone modern TV.

No. Video games are on the same level of books, movies or TV. If Books and movies are arts then so are video games. The thought that video games are all naturally inferior in this regard should be done away with.

 

[Elfgore]

Not every game needs to do this. I think people are just getting frustrated, especially with Ubisoft since this is their third or fourth time doing this, of companies advertising these games as being political when they're not. Like look at Far Cry 5. The trailers and imagery all up to the point of release heavily implied via imagery and context the antagonistic cult were a Christian, nationalistic cult. Except that's never the case. They're just alluding to it in trailers and then drop it in game so that most members are drugged up on a magical mind-control drug. They're alluding to having a political message and advertising as having one, then you play the game and it's a farce never brought up again.

Not every game needs to have political commentary, but companies should stop advertising their games like they do when they don't. It's frustrating.

 

[Nedoras]

Not every game needs to do this. I think people are just getting frustrated, especially with Ubisoft since this is their third or fourth time doing this, of companies advertising these games as being political when they're not. Like look at Far Cry 5. The trailers and imagery all up to the point of release heavily implied via imagery and context the antagonistic cult were a Christian, nationalistic cult. Except that's never the case. They're just alluding to it in trailers and then drop it in game so that most members are drugged up on a magical mind-control drug. They're alluding to having a political message and advertising as having one, then you play the game and it's a farce never brought up again.

Not every game needs to have political commentary, but companies should stop advertising their games like they do when they don't. It's frustrating.

Pretty much this. They basically did end up sending a message, and it's that they're more than willing to exploit the hell out of the current political climate to sell a video-game. Honestly I do get it though. Their games are extremely bland and they want any kind of attention getting setting to disguise that. It's just that you can't play with political themes and messages, and then just pretend that you're not. The Division 2 is also ridiculously blatant to where people are obviously going to call them out for it.

 

[Bilious Green_v1legacy]

It doesn't have to; it could if the creators want it to, but there is no obligation to do so. John Carmack (of Id Software) once said, "Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie. It's expected to be there, but it's not that important". While I think this is no longer as true as it was in the days of OG Doom, it remains true that many games can get by on the strength of their gameplay without much weight given to story. Conversely, there are many games that live and die by their storytelling, with the gameplay being merely a vehicle for delivering the story. Neither one is more right or wrong than the other; its simply a matter of what the objective and intent of the developers is. In the case of a lootershooter like Div2, story is clearly of tertiary importance.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

The problem with trying to tell a god story in games is the task of making it cohesive with gameplay to the point that one isn?t distracting from the other. As impressive and cinematic as the new God of War was, I was never drawn into the storytelling the way a movie, TV show or book spins a good yarn. Why? Because in those mediums I?m not hacking away at NPCs, scouring a cave for upgrades, dying and restarting a tough challenge, pausing the action to level up the protagonist?s abilities, etc.

About the closest example of a game being pretty much inseparably woven with its narrative would be something like Journey, which was also uniquely void of any dialog. The story was completely told through character actions within gameplay; something that?s rarely done so effectively. Also, it?s done in a way that is unlike any other medium, which was mentioned above.

I didn?t mean to sound like games shouldn?t try to say anything important or have messages, but more that they should focus on doing so in a way which no other medium could do better. A game like The Division 2 wouldn?t have a chance within its design, because it?s bogged down far too heavily in the hundreds of gamey ?tasks? which have nothing to do with any message it might be trying to seriously convey to the player. This is why I said people don?t really care about story in games, because the vast majority of times the game will indirectly do its damndest to discourage them from doing so.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Also, the whole point of a narrative is deliver themes/messages to the audience. If a game wants to send no message whatsoever, don't have a narrative then, which is an avenue that games can go.

Disagree with that. You can easily have a narrative without any themes. Themes will certainly elevate the narrative (at least if handled well), but a narrative can be good, even engaging, without any deeper meaning behind it.

I can't think of a great narrative without any themes/messages, even something like Guardians of the Galaxy is pretty heavy in theme.

A game like The Division 2 wouldn?t have a chance within its design, because it?s bogged down far too heavily in the hundreds of gamey ?tasks? which have nothing to do with any message it might be trying to seriously convey to the player. This is why I said people don?t really care about story in games, because the vast majority of times the game will indirectly do its damndest to discourage them from doing so.

Funny thing about that is Jim's Jimpressions said all the live-service and open world aspects are where the game is boring and it would've worked much better with just the linear missions strung together.

 

[Hawki]

I can't think of a great narrative without any themes/messages, even something like Guardians of the Galaxy is pretty heavy in theme.

Didn't say it had to be great. But I'd have to contest GotG being heavy on theme.

If we want to look at another MCU, let's take, I dunno, Spider-Man: Homecoming. Solid characters, solid story, solid pacing, solid plot. But it's hardly got any deeper theme behind it.

 

[Dalisclock]

Not every game needs to do this. I think people are just getting frustrated, especially with Ubisoft since this is their third or fourth time doing this, of companies advertising these games as being political when they're not. Like look at Far Cry 5. The trailers and imagery all up to the point of release heavily implied via imagery and context the antagonistic cult were a Christian, nationalistic cult. Except that's never the case. They're just alluding to it in trailers and then drop it in game so that most members are drugged up on a magical mind-control drug. They're alluding to having a political message and advertising as having one, then you play the game and it's a farce never brought up again.

Not every game needs to have political commentary, but companies should stop advertising their games like they do when they don't. It's frustrating.

Pretty much this. They basically did end up sending a message, and it's that they're more than willing to exploit the hell out of the current political climate to sell a video-game. Honestly I do get it though. Their games are extremely bland and they want any kind of attention getting setting to disguise that. It's just that you can't play with political themes and messages, and then just pretend that you're not. The Division 2 is also ridiculously blatant to where people are obviously going to call them out for it.

Ubisoft falls into this trope hard. Acting like the game has something to say and then walking it back the moment they have a chance to say it like "Oh, it's just a game". Fry Cry 5, Assassin's Creed Syndicate(and apparently Unity as well), Division 1 and 2. It's kinda frustrating when you blatantly tease that there is something political and relevant, only to more or less ignore it and it's implications as much as possible and then keep on doing it.

 

[Casual Shinji]

There's no point to talk about 'need', every piece of fiction is going to send a message regardless whether intentional or not, I don't care if it's Commando or Batman and Robin.

This is why I said people don?t really care about story in games, because the vast majority of times the game will indirectly do its damndest to discourage them from doing so.

Just because you don't care how certain games tell their stories doesn't mean everybody else doesn't. It shouldn't be impossible to wrap your head around people liking a game's story and characters BECAUSE you get to run around the world and drive their actions.

 

[Hawki]

There's no point to talk about 'need', every piece of fiction is going to send a message regardless whether intentional or not, I don't care if it's Commando or Batman and Robin.

What kind of message is Batman and Robin sending?

 

[Casual Shinji]

There's no point to talk about 'need', every piece of fiction is going to send a message regardless whether intentional or not, I don't care if it's Commando or Batman and Robin.

What kind of message is Batman and Robin sending?

Well, good guys vs. bad guys for one; what makes the good guy good and the bad guys bad. That's a default message most genre movies have. And isn't there a whole thing about distrust being sown between Batman and Robin due to Poison Ivy and them overcoming it? Then you have Mr. Freeze doing bad because he wants to cure his wife, but eventually somewhat seeing the error of his ways. The movie might handle its message badly but the message is still there.