This Game sucks because the Story is bad.

[Strain42]

I didn't read all of this because it was long and I'm kinda busy (I know, I know, why bother posting at all, right?)

But to me, I totally understand disliking a game because the story sucks.

There have been plenty of games where the gameplay has been perfectly fine, or hell, even good, but I will stop playing it because I hate the story, or the characters are really annoying.

And what I think is crazy, is that decision seems to be considered peculiar by other gamers.

But really, why is it so weird to dislike a game for having a shitty story? Even if the gameplay is good, why waste my time with it when there are literally thousands of other video games out there that probably have gameplay that is just as good, if not better, where I actually do like the story?

Now I've also been on the other side. There have been games where I'm utterly in love with the story and the characters, but if the gameplay isn't my cup of tea, I'm going to put it aside.

Bad gameplay and Bad story are both totally acceptable reasons to dislike a game. An ideal game does both well to keep players both interested, and having fun.

Even something small, let's look at Portal for example. Portal's gameplay is perfectly fine. It works well, and it's fun.

But imagine if Portal had no dialogue in it. Imagine if there was no Glados, the companion cube was just a blank cube, and the little gun robots didn't talk. The game is now identical in every way, but no story in it.

Because Portal has good gameplay, I'm sure the game still would have been well received. But I guarantee you that it would not have become the amazing pop culture icon in gaming that it has become without the story. It would have just been a quick and enjoyable game that people played once or twice, finished in a few hours and put it aside.

So if a game can go from good to great because of the story, why can't it go from good to bad because of it as well?

 

[Weaver]

What happens when it's another Kojima disaster like MGS4 and the story is about 90% of the game?

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Story makes or breaks a game for me. I found Battlefield 3 to be a horrible game because the story made no sense to me. It was cliche after cliche, non-memorable characters, and took itself way too seriously. Sure, the multiplayer was solid and, "who buys battlefield for the story?" gets thrown around a lot, but I trade that game in real quick. Also, I get bored with the Left 4 Dead series because the story is not there (first game) or is minimal (second game). Yes, it's fun to kill zombies with friends, but without a story, a game can't hold my interest at all. Final Fantasy XII, a game that many Final Fantasy fans and critics say was amazing for its gameplay, was the worst in the series to me because the story was a mess. If I have to think to recall Final Fantasy characters' names, something's wrong with the game and the story in it.
On the flip side, I played the living daylights out of Final Fantasy VII: Dirge of Cerberus because I love the storyline for anything Final Fantasy VII. The controls were pretty bad and Vincent does not control like he should (I want to be able to one-shot a helicopter like in the opening cutscene, not sit there and fire again and again at it), but because I liked the story, I loved the game. I played Xenosaga Episode II several times, even though it's gameplay was vastly different and inferior to the first game because I loved the story and wanted to know what happened. Final Fantasy X-2 may have been a joke and painful to a lot of people, but because it continued the storyline of X, I loved it. And I enjoy the storylines for the Call of Duty games, seeing how they tie together and what happens to each character because, to me, they are better written than Battlefield 3, even if B3 may be the better between the two series.

So, I guess I'm one of those people. If the story sucks, or just isn't there, I will not enjoy the game, no matter how well in controls or how much fun other people have with it.

 

[Friendly Lich]

Right now I think the industry should focus more on gameplay.

 

[jackinmydaniels]

Sounds like your just throwing your opinion around like it should be the end all be all and that the rest of us that value story as much as the gameplay are a bunch of idiots that should just go read a book or something.

You see the great thing about video games is that they don't have to obey any rules, you can make a game where the gameplay takes a back seat to the story and still have a good game. Like Telltale's Walking Dead game, you don't really play the actual game part of the game a whole lot but its built as more of an interactive experience and that's totally fine. Some games do the opposite and pick gameplay over story, like Mario, you pick those up to jump on shit as a fat plumber, not to be engrossed in an ever changing plot.

Other games find a happy mix between the two, and that's fine as well, but shitting on a game that's built around gameplay because of a lack of story is wrong, just like doing the opposite is.

What I think actually happens is that a bad story in a fairly generic game is always seen as a negative point because then there's nothing remarkable about it at all.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

I'm inclined to agree with you about stupid people calling a game crap for only having a flawed storyline. There are plenty of people on this forum that cannot tell the difference between a bad game and a bad story, and some who think that a good story can carry a bad game...which it can't.

Poor gameplay = poor game
Poor story = poor story telling

I'm not playing a story when i play a game, i'm playing a game with the context of a story. The 2 can mix as much as they want but only the gameplay is necessary.

A story without gameplay is called a film or a book

 

[piinyouri]

I agree with you OP.

I have my own theory as to why I can ignore bad writing and stories in games as long as I find something to enjoy about the gameplay.

Many moons ago when I was playing things like Adventures in the Magical Kingdom and Air Fortress on my NES, I couldn't read. Never had a clue what was being said on screen. But I soldiered through my games somehow. (With the exception of Final Fantasy. Never firgured out how to equip anything.)

My theory is that because of the way I started playing them, a good story has never been something I expect in a game. You could say I play games for a more basic and (ugh) "old-school" reason, one that is more simple and primal.
For the love of the gameplay itself, reminiscent of old arcades.

But I wouldn't say that cause it sounds pretentious as shit.

And I've definitely enjoyed my fair share of stories. It's not that I willfully try to ignore them from the get go, but it's just not that much a detriment to me if its mediocre or bad.

I'unno, different strokes an' all.

 

[ScrabbitRabbit]

I agree with you OP.

I have my own theory as to why I can ignore bad writing and stories in games as long as I find something to enjoy about the gameplay.

Many moons ago when I was playing things like Adventures in the Magical Kingdom and Air Fortress on my NES, I couldn't read. Never had a clue what was being said on screen. But I soldiered through my games somehow. (With the exception of Final Fantasy. Never firgured out how to equip anything.)

My theory is that because of the way I started playing them, a good story has never been something I expect in a game. You could say I play games for a more basic and (ugh) "old-school" reason, one that is more simple and primal.
For the love of the gameplay itself, reminiscent of old arcades.

But I wouldn't say that cause it sounds pretentious as shit.

And I've definitely enjoyed my fair share of stories. It's not that I willfully try to ignore them from the get go, but it's just not that much a detriment to me if its mediocre or bad.

I'unno, different strokes an' all.

I find that whether or not a bad plot bothers me depends on the game. I didn't care at all that Psi-Ops had a terrible story because cutscenes were brief, infrequent and skippable. However bad the writing was, slamming mooks into walls, setting them on fire then throwing them at their friends was just so damn fun that I couldn't care less.

Max Payne 3, on the other hand, is thoroughly unenjoyable for me. I absolutely love the way the shooting feels, Rockstar's physics engine makes everything better... but it's just constantly shoving it's plot down my throat and I couldn't give less of a shit. It's a boring, poorly written B-movie script with absolutely awful direction and it really grates on me. The game is definitely story driven, so if you don't like the story, you don't like the game.

That -could- be as much an issue with the level design, though. Gameplay sections feel extremely brief and almost inconsequential. I suspect I'd have an issue with that even if I found the story riveting.

I do wish that modern games didn't all have to have a story of some kind. Some games are just better without.

 

[piinyouri]

I agree with you OP.

I have my own theory as to why I can ignore bad writing and stories in games as long as I find something to enjoy about the gameplay.

Many moons ago when I was playing things like Adventures in the Magical Kingdom and Air Fortress on my NES, I couldn't read. Never had a clue what was being said on screen. But I soldiered through my games somehow. (With the exception of Final Fantasy. Never firgured out how to equip anything.)

My theory is that because of the way I started playing them, a good story has never been something I expect in a game. You could say I play games for a more basic and (ugh) "old-school" reason, one that is more simple and primal.
For the love of the gameplay itself, reminiscent of old arcades.

But I wouldn't say that cause it sounds pretentious as shit.

And I've definitely enjoyed my fair share of stories. It's not that I willfully try to ignore them from the get go, but it's just not that much a detriment to me if its mediocre or bad.

I'unno, different strokes an' all.

I find that whether or not a bad plot bothers me depends on the game. I didn't care at all that Psi-Ops had a terrible story because cutscenes were brief, infrequent and skippable. However bad the writing was, slamming mooks into walls, setting them on fire then throwing them at their friends was just so damn fun that I couldn't care less.

Max Payne 3, on the other hand, is thoroughly unenjoyable for me. I absolutely love the way the shooting feels, Rockstar's physics engine makes everything better... but it's just constantly shoving it's plot down my throat and I couldn't give less of a shit. It's a boring, poorly written B-movie script with absolutely awful direction and it really grates on me. The game is definitely story driven, so if you don't like the story, you don't like the game.

That -could- be as much an issue with the level design, though. Gameplay sections feel extremely brief and almost inconsequential. I suspect I'd have an issue with that even if I found the story riveting.

I do wish that modern games didn't all have to have a story of some kind. Some games are just better without.

That was the point I was making in regards to my personal habbits with games and stories.

If I was playing MP3, and really enjoyed the game/gameplay, but hated the story and cutscenes, I'd skip them. I'd be missing LOADS of context and possible directions, and that I would assume would be where most people would become detached enough that they would likely quit the game.

But I can keep playing at that point, as long as I'm having fun with the game itself.
I used to watch certain scenes in games for fear of getting lost and not knowing where to go next, but the internet has made that a non existence nowadays.

 

[DugMachine]

If the story keeps getting thrown in our face even though it's shit why shouldn't people be upset? You can have the greatest gameplay in the world but if your story is badly written it takes a lot away from the game.

Most of the time a game with a bad story but innovative mechanics will keep me interested but if both are poorly executed no matter how unique the mechanics are then it's just not for me.

 

[ScrabbitRabbit]

I I was playing MP3, and really enjoyed the game/gameplay, but hated the story and cutscenes, I'd skip them.

Therein lies the issue with MP3, I'm afraid. Several cutscenes are unskippable as they disguise loading screens. They can take many minutes loading off of an SSD of all things.

If they were skippable I wouldn't have as much of an issue, but it still takes away control to throw plot at you, even in what's ostensibly meant to be gameplay.

I guess my point is, is that if a game has such a heavy focus on story, it'd better be a darned good one. And cutscenes should never be unskippable.

 

[piinyouri]

I I was playing MP3, and really enjoyed the game/gameplay, but hated the story and cutscenes, I'd skip them.

Therein lies the issue with MP3, I'm afraid. Several cutscenes are unskippable as they disguise loading screens. They can take many minutes loading off of an SSD of all things.

If they were skippable I wouldn't have as much of an issue, but it still takes away control to throw plot at you, even in what's ostensibly meant to be gameplay.

I guess my point is, is that if a game has such a heavy focus on story, it'd better be a darned good one. And cutscenes should never be unskippable.

Hmmm, well in a case like that it would depend on just how bad/boring the scenes and story where.
At that point I'd basically be doing risk assessment. (Am I having enough fun to warrant sitting here watching these scenes)

I will say, for those sort of unskippable ones, I'd have to be having a damned good time with a game to take that for very long.

 

[lacktheknack]

Sometimes, it does apply.

Ever played Syberia?

Now, imagine the same gorgeous artstyle, the same clever puzzles, the quirky characters and the same locations and scope... but instead of looking for a brain-damaged inventor by following the trail of automatons, you're looking for a tiger that escaped from a zoo. And cut the dialog to simple "I'm not letting you by until you do A, B and C!"

Would you play it? I sure wouldn't.

 

[lord.jeff]

I'll agree that gameplay is the most important in most cases, but to say it's the only thing that matters because games are an interactive medium is like saying "visuals are the most important part of a film, stories are for books"

 

[Hawkeye 131]

I came to this realization about a month ago. For the record I don't like to beat an already pulverized horse but I'll use Mass Effect 3 because it is such a great example.

IMO, the three most important aspects of any game are story, gameplay and graphics, (in no particular order). At first I HATED ME3. As a HUGE fan of BioWare and the Mass Effect franchise I was very angry with what ME3 was and "could" have been. I felt there was some serious potential to tell an amazing story while at the same time bring closure to all the different story threads that had been created. However, the negative aspects, the ending, non-consequence choices, lack of exploration (just name a few), damn near killed my interest in ME3. I quite literally went through a period grief after completing ME3 (March 21st). I hit all five stages, denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance .

When BioWare announced that they were going to release DLC to "clarify" the ending, that's when I hit rock bottom because I knew they were not going to change the ending (which I felt was the correct thing to do). What also bothered me was how did this happen? I it's clear to see that the men and women at BioWare are very talented whether you like their games or not. I mean just go and watch any Casey Hudson interview on youtube (pre ME3 release). I consider myself to be a very good judge of character and I can tell he's clearly an intelligent, humble and creative person. So how did this happen?

"Having had considerable time to ponder your query, my answer has not changed..." A cookie for anyone that gets that reference.

Looking back on it now ME3 was great in certain aspects, voice acting, graphics, gameplay (for the most part), certain story elements (Tuchunka and geth story arcs and et al), audio design, UI, RPG elements, etc... Depending on what persepective your looking, your individual tastes, interests, passions, etc... Mass Effect 3 very well may have been a success.

I do agree with you that just because a game's story may be bad while the rest, (gameplay, graphics, etc...) is good doesn't mean it's a complete "write off", not to be played ever. Again it boils down to your own opinion. I hate the ME3 ending yet there are people who love it.

-Hawk

 

[Rabid Toilet]

It depends on what the game's focus is. If the story only exists to push the gameplay forward, the game can still be good even if the story is bad. If, however, the gameplay is there to forward the story, then a bad story will ruin the game.

As an example: Planescape: Torment has pretty bad gameplay. It was functional, but it certainly wasn't much fun. And yet the game is widely regarded as being incredibly good. This is because the focus of the game was its story. The poor combat was excused because you weren't playing it for the combat, you were playing to see what happens next in the story.

On the other end of the spectrum, you have a game like Resident Evil 4. A game with a laughable story and mediocre at best writing. Yet this game is also held in very high regard. That's because the game was focused on the gameplay. The story was there as a hook to get you from one area to another, not to be the major point of the game.

A game is good if it excels at what it's trying to do. If the game isn't trying to tell a deep and compelling story, it shouldn't be marked down for not having one.

 

[Berenzen]

If it's an RPG of any sort, damn right I want a good plot out of it. RPGs, by their very nature are plot-driven games. I can drive through bad gameplay, though good gameplay helps a lot. Basically any game that is plot driven (any RPG ever, and a lot of recent video games), I feel needs to have a great plot in order to work, if they don't, then yes, they are a bad game.

In contrast, gameplay driven games I could care less about in terms of story. I can play Serious Sam and have a blast, because the story doesn't matter, it's about setting up humourous one-liners rather than any sort of good writing. I don't knock it because of it's writing.

Really it comes down to the whole fun/entertainment thing. Something can be entertaining but not fun- see any book really. Plot-driven games are not meant to be fun they're meant to be entertaining in the sense of gripping you and making the player think. In contrast, Doom-likes are fun rather than thought provoking. I like both, but they're two different ways of developing games.

So yes, a bad story can seriously drag down a game, but a bad story won't drag down all games.

(And seriously guys, I know I brought up the whole fun/entertainment thing, but don't sperging out about it, they're synonyms, they don't mean exactly the same thing, so if you're quoting to fight that idea, take a deep breathe and delete it.)