This Game sucks because the Story is bad.

[TeletubbiesGolfGun]

Because the internet is wrong.
Because it forgets gameplay is important. Hell, sometimes I think it forgets what gameplay actually is.

Objectivity: applies to everyone.

It all depends what you want from a game. A game can be carried on gameplay, but even mediocre gameplay can be carried on a good story. A good story is part of the experience. Think of the first mass effect: the gameplay wasn't great, but the story and characters were able to make the game enjoyable. A painting doesn't have to make you laugh to be a good painting, and the same applies here.

Yes, gameplay can be important. But other people can enjoy a strong story, and if that's what they thought they would get and are disappointed they will say so. Its not just 'whining on the internet' if you don't agree.

You like action. Alright, that's fine. But people like different things, and that doesn't mean they're wrong either.

bravo, couldn't agree more.

nice vector avatar..if that's what it is.

can't add much more to it than this, sure some games are carried by polished/amazing gameplay, other times, a solid story or atmosphere or characters are what make it worth playing.

I know personally in alot of games, i play because i can't wait to find out what will happen next, or how my actions will affect the story/atmosphere around me.

then again, their is the occasional dickhead cpu/person i just want to blow the fuck away, and for that, i have just cause 2 and team fortress 2

 

[TK421]

I tend to think if the game has great gameplay, and gamplay is the focus, then it's a great game. But if it's supposed to focus on the story (Mass Effect, Bioshock, etc.) then it sure as hell better tell it well.
[small]heh. I made a rhyme [/small]

 

[lunavixen]

The thing is, though your argument does have merit in some aspects, the enjoyment of a game is a subjective thing, I love story centralised games like Odin Sphere and Final Fantasy (and Mass Effect), but I also love games that are just pretty much cathartic potential with a storyline of "Because I said so". To me sandbox games are awesome if they are done right like inFAMOUS and the Batman: Arkham games.

For me, good games have good immersion, something that keeps me playing and doesn't let me surface to remind myself that I should have eaten hours ago, Minecraft and Mass Effect being classic examples of this (opposite ends of the story spectrum, both of which i love).

 

[Teacakes]

I have never in my life encountered anyone who disowned a game because everything was stellar except the story, so I don't really understand what OP is complaining about.

A friend of mine put down Gears of War because the story was, in his words, "refrigerators fighting thalidomide mutants in the ruins of a Halo ripoff." But he also really disliked the gameplay and the art direction, so that's not a case of bashing a game because he didn't like the story. I also really enjoyed the first Kingdom Hearts, despite disliking the story quite a bit. The gameplay was consistently fun and the settings visually interesting, which is enough to keep me playing most titles.

That's not to say my own experience proves you wrong. I just don't understand where you're coming from.

 

[Faladorian]

Yeah, no. If a story has a significant story element, it damn well better deliver or a large chunk of the game went down the shitter. If the game was never about the story (think Quake 3 Arena, Unreal Tournament, various fighter games and so on) then the lack of a good story is fine.

In short: If there's a story and it's bad, then the game becomes bad simply because the story is not a separate thing from the game.

This applies to most things.


One thing I will say, however, is that some games are a whole hell of a lot of fun when the story is a pile of doo-doo.

Case in point: All mario games.

They all have the same plot and it sucks SO bad it's not even funny (unless you're playing paper mario or Mario & Luigi RPGS... those can be pretty hilarious) but the gameplay is always fun as hell. Or at least I think so.

In fact, this brings up another point that a game can be fun, have great writing, and have a terrible story all at the same time.

 

[Vegosiux]

so I don't really understand what OP is complaining about.

The fact that other people have the sheer audacity to set their priorities differently than he sets his own, at least that's what I gather from it.

Seriously...how dare they.

 

[Mikeyfell]

They're games. They're meant to be played. If everything you do while playing objectively works well, the game is good - no matter if the writing is Shakespeare or daytime soap opera. Maybe a stupid sequel to a well-written original deserves to be marked down - maybe. But on its own? No.

The chances that this argument will help put anything in perspective are zero, but I have nothing better to do.

It's a movie, it's meant to be watched the acting doesn't matter.
It's a play, it's meant to be watched the Lighting doesn't matter
It's a toilet it's meant to dispose of poop it doesn't matter if the seat is comfortable.
It's a TV it's meant to be looked at it doesn't matter if it has speakers.
It's food it's meant to nourish you it doesn't matter if it tastes good.
It's a book it's meant to be read it doesn't matter if the pages smell funny.
It's a phone It's meant to make calls it doesn't matter if it has a camera, or the internet, or can shoot HD video, or send text messages or any other number of non phone things that phones do now days
It's an argument, it's meant to persuade you! It doesn't matter if it uses hyperbole!
See my point?


With... Hold on. Opinion Incoming With most games today being first or third person cover based shooters that are less fun than watching paint dry a decently crafted story can make me slog through the gameplay. EG Mass Effect, Fallout 3 or Bioshock (that you mentioned). I love those games but if I was just shooting at the bad guys because they were shooting at me I'd have put them down and never given them a second thought.
Same with RPG's I play a lot of strategy RPGs and if I didn't have context for the numbers I was making number all over the enemy numbers I wouldn't care.

On the other hand games that offer something mechanically engaging like Rock Band or Mirror's Edge those games would be fun regardless. But what's to keep you interested from one challenge objective to another challenge objective. If you break a game (Your favorite game) down to it's simplest elements why are you playing it? are you playing to prove that you can aim at hit boxes faster than those hit boxes can aim back at you? Are you playing to prove that your muscle memory and reflexes are faster than the AI is programed to be? Are you playing because you want the numberiest numbers in all the land?
(Or are you playing a puzzle game, or Shadow of the Colossus, or any number of other games that don't fit the very broad examples I gave?)
The point is, chances are you're doing one of those things and why do you care? Is it simply for the joy of feeling superior to a machine?

The reason I kept climbing the towers in Catherine was because I wanted Vincent to wake up. If I didn't have the story I'd still play because it's fun, but I wouldn't care. and a little caring is so much more engaging than all the fun in the world.

Because the internet is wrong.
Because it forgets gameplay is important. Hell, sometimes I think it forgets what gameplay actually is.

Saying that isn't going to come back to bite you.

 

[Simon Pettersson]

It all depends on why I buy the game in the first place.
I bought ME3 for the end of an amazing story, and I bought Dark Souls for it´s gameplay.

Me 3 sucked because It didn´t keep me interested in the story, and in dark souls its the other way around the gameplay keeps me coming back.

 

[Amaror]

snip

So from this i conclude you would still think a film with a absolute crappy story is a good film because it looks good?
After all it's a film, its meant to be seen.
Or a book with a boring story is still a good book, when it is well written?
After all it's a book, its meant to be read.
Sorry but just NO.
Story is a part of the experience and has a HUGE impact on that experience.
And i don't call games with perfect gameplay and shitty story shit.
I call games with shitty to mediocre gameplay and horrible story shit.

 

[Casual Shinji]

If the story is there, it needs to add to the overall experience of the game. Story tends to add motivation to what your character is doing, and if the story is lazy, uninspired, unengaging, or just not enjoyable, then what motivation is there to keep playing?

What constitutes as a "good" game story is up for debate. I thought the story of Resident Evil 4 was great, because I enjoyed the cheese and it added to the experience of playing the game. On the otherhand the story of Red Faction: Guerrilla was fucking boring as shit, despite the gameplay being pretty cool.

 

[wakeup]

story is the most important thing in games for me, and its part of the industry so yes a game should be marked down for a bad story because it has become a important part of games.

So, say, Doom and Wing Commander should be considered poor games of their time because of their non-existent or laughable plot lines?

i said it has become a important part of games, when doom came out story's in games were almost nonexistent. by today's standard it would be marked down for that because games have evolved since then. i didn't say it would make them "poor" games just that they should be marked down.

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

It's a matter of context in my opinion. A fun game is a fun game, no matter if the story is good or not. But a great story can turn a mediocre game into a good game or even a great game.

 

[Acton Hank]

I agree with the OP.

Gameplay should always come first.
That's not to say that a good story can't overcome less than stellar gameplay and make the game enjoyable, but gameplay should always be the most important part; otherwise what's the point of it being a videogame?

Conversely if the story is bad then it should never get in the way of gameplay
IE unskippable cutscenes and other similar nonsense.

Scratch that, unskippable cutscenes shouldn't exist... at all.

 

[Treblaine]

Games need a good story like a song needs good lyrics... goods songs don't actually need lyrics but some song lyrics can be so bad that they utterly ruin the song the same *can* happen with video games story.

But ultimately video games excel by their experience, their flow like a song, the story weaves into that like lyrics weave into a good song but taking them out they still work and the lyrics/game-story by itself don't stand very well on their own.

 

[Acton Hank]

Jay444111

I play videogames for the the same reason most people play videogames or watch movies or read books: Entertainment.

Entertainment doesn't exclusively come in the form of good storytelling, there's a thing called fun gameplay, it's one of the defining characteristics of a good game, and I don't think story should be considered more important.

 

[CleverNickname]

My OP sucked. It's horrible. Ugh.
Still, this one won't be any better

All I'm saying is... there is a danger in emphasizing story over gameplay. It's defensible, yes, and it's largely dependent on personal taste, but this was never about personal taste, this was about games. Games that do well all around, are better - for everyone, not just better for my preferred kind of gaming entertainment - than the nice stories that play so-so.

And obviously I fell into the internet-trap of phrasing it only negatively. "Stop liking stories guys" (which I never said or even implied btw), instead of "Hey, why aren't we complaining about continuously mediocre cookie-cutter gameplay everywhere, instead of ignoring that just because there is some nice stories to be had?"

Thing is, I love how we get more and more stories that work well. It just pains me to see them wrapped in play-experiences that are as stimulating as spreadsheets. It hurts. I genuinely wished all those games were ... well... better games.

Because I will stick to the whole "games are meant to be played" thing. That's just true, twisting it around with shitty movie-analogies doesn't change it. Even the makers of the most artsy nigh-non-interactive emotional thing will ask you "Play this game for this unique experience". Maybe not all of them are meant to be played for fun - and I've seen the Extra Credits episode on Spec Ops, and I agree it doesn't have to be fun per se; but even if it's depressing, it's ... enjoyment? Damn, no, has the word "joy" in it, that won't work. Well, we still like it because it does something for us and we let it. Requiem for a Dream and Boy in the Striped Pyjamas sure as hell aren't fun, but I don't exactly wish I'd never seen them. I'm glad I did. Cuz holy shit!

Right, where was I? Oh yeah, games. Better games. I want better games, and you can't fault me for that. And no, it's not just disagreeing over opinions. We don't have to care who liked Mass Effect more, or Skyrim, or Borderlands. But better games are better games, and games that could have been better (in the gameplay department) could have been better. There clearly isn't as much room to argue there, surely?

It's just... devs and publishers do notice what "we" like... and we end up with games that market themselves as epic journeys, with characters and places and multiple endings and... we never learn what it's like to play them. And when reviews as well as general internet opinion is just like that...
I can't help but feel like something went horribly wrong and nobody noticed. But me. Because I'm full of it like that. No, you know what I mean. I worry. And I worry that not more people worry. Because it's worrisome. Worryingly so.

Jokes aside though. Games are games. As such, gameplay is important. Story CAN be important, but when it is, it should serve the gameplay. That's perfection. Apparently (and I say apparently because I don't play masterpieces if they look boring as hell), people don't seem to mind if the story is good despite the gameplay, instead of because of it. And I don't get why anyone would think that. I genuinely don't understand it. 3 pages into this thread I still don't understand it.
Oh, and I realize (and someone mentioned it), that Yahtzee wrote this thing about story and gameplay intermingling, but he seems to have forgotten that lately, so I thought I'd remind people. Because it is the best of both worlds, and why should any of us settle for less?