Why do people care so much about storylines?

[Evilproduct]

who says you play games for the gameplay? sometimes the gameplay flatout sucks. i play for the story becuase the story interests me. every great story deserves to be told, even if you have to suffer through horrible gameplay mechanics to experience it. i for one hate most JRPGs, mostly for the horrible battle systems and the terrible storylines and voice acting.

 

[Jandau]

all i'm saying is that I really don't understand this whole "games are more than just gameplay" thing that everyone seems to latch onto

In that case, stick to gameplay. I enjoy games both for the gameplay as well as for their potential as mediums for interactive storytellying. I like my stories non-linear and littered with choices. And we both get to like what we like.

As for further explanation as to why people look for more in games than just gameplay, I covered my thoughts on that in my previous post, so won't repeat myself.

 

[Danny Ocean]

you PLAY GAMES for the GAMEPLAY.

People like stories because they give the gameplay purpose. This can heighten the tension and provoke genuine emotional reactions.

And no, you play games for the gameplay only. I play them for more reasons.

 

[Velocity Eleven]

you PLAY GAMES for the GAMEPLAY.

Because they give the gameplay purpose.

I don't really understand that

 

[Samcanuck]

Immersion man. Thats what its about for me. I mean you tell if a book is good or not from the writting. If it's crappy writting, its going to be a crappy book. But a book thats well written but boring as hell doesn't hook you.

To me, same goes for games and storyline.

 

[Banana Phone Man]

I get what you are saying. Gameplay is a reason that you can play a game for but it isn't the only reason. Lets use some examples.
MW2 has a pretty bad story, not the most compelling to finish and it felt like I had done it before but the game play was fun for me to continue playing.

HL2, is and FPS and when you look at it, it's not a good one. FPS's have come a long way from when it was made and now it is pretty poor standard when it comes to shooters but the story is compelling, driving people like myself to play it over and over again. This is why it is still popular after all these years.

Dawn of War was a good RTS when I had it (before it broke). The game gave you the main story faction (Space Marines) and put them into scenarios with different objective to complete related to the story which made it varied and intersting. Yet when they released DoW Dark Cruade and Soulstorm, it was repetitve, nothing but the gameplay there to make me want to play the same thing over and over. It got stale fast. Too repetitive for my taste.

HL2 story on the other hand is all that I can come back to and I can get into it even though I know how it ends already. It's hard to explain. Saying you like games only for gameplay is like saying you like to read because you like to look at words. That's not all that you look for in a book and Gameplay is not all you have to look for in a game. It can include Story, gameplay, graphics, music and a lot more. For example I don't strum a plastic guitar in GH because I like it but because it combines with great music to add more to the game.

That's my mixed bag of clusterf**k opinions. Sorry for the long read. General message is that gameplay is a single element that you look for in a game. Some games it is more important than things like story, graphics etc and makes the game replayable. Most games though you need more than just gameplay.

 

[liquidus118]

Because story can add so much to a game, and make the gameplay so much better. It creates interesting characters and back-story's and personalities and motivations that make the gameplay mean much more or be much more entertaining.

Would the fight against The Boss at the end of MGS3 been half what it was if it was just person A killing person B? Would the ending of Crisis Core have been as exciting and desperate if it was just some dude fighting lots of other dudes with no context? Would Silent Hill 2 be as scary as it was without the story-based symbolism, characters themes and twists? Would Half Life 2 be so popular, fun and gosh-darn well made without a plot to drive it? No. No they would not be.

Sure, story isn't strictly gameplay based. But a good game can become a million times better with a great story.

 

[Danny Ocean]

you PLAY GAMES for the GAMEPLAY.

Because they give the gameplay purpose.

I don't really understand that

Why? It's not like it's hard to understand. Stories give reasons and motivation to explain why your game character is doing what he's doing. What's not to get?

Playing a game without the story is like watching Black Hawk Down without any dialogue. You have no idea what's going on, why they're there, why they're doing what they're doing, and no reason to want them to continue. You're just being amused by the pretty explosions and tense action. Action which is significantly less tense due to lack of significance.

 

[kawaiiamethist]

People still discuss gameplay and expect damn good gameplay for their money. Examples of gameplay topics in the more recent JRPGs:

FFVII - materia
FFVIII - magic syphoning, junctioning
FFIX - ineffective limit break system, skill acquisition
FFX - no world map, blitzball, CTB, sphere grid
FFX-2 - ATB, dress spheres, missions
FFXII - gambits, liscenses, loot
FFXIII - paradigm shift
Shadow Hearts series - judgement ring, combos
Last Remnant - units, drilling
Lost Odyssey - skill acquisition, levelling caps
Enchanted Arms - golems, grid
Infinite Undiscovery - party compatability, item creation
Eternal Sonata - light/dark moves
Blue Dragon - battle initiation, three way battles
Magna Carta - combo input for any move (I fucking hate that system, first and only time I have ragequit a JRPG within 2 hours), area chi
Magna Carta II - Kamonds, kan, chain breaks

Retro gamers and people who just don't like JRPGs, for Jeebus' sake, JRPGs are not a copy and paste affair. They all share similiarities, given they're from the same genre, but you can't expect to walk into a game and instantly master the gameplay. In fact, JRPGs are quickly slammed if they're too base; Lost Odyssey has been equally slammed and praised for its old school turn based approach, and Dragoneer's Aria for PSP is one of the most dull, uninteresting modern JRPGs you can come across because it offer NOTHING new (and battles are painfully slow).

 

[Velocity Eleven]

you PLAY GAMES for the GAMEPLAY.

Because they give the gameplay purpose.

I don't really understand that

Why? It's not like it's hard to understand. Stories give reasons and motivation to explain why your game character is doing what he's doing. What's not to get?

Playing a game without the story is like watching Black Hawk Down without any dialogue. You have no idea what's going on, why they're there, why they're doing what they're doing, and no reason to want them to continue. You're just being amused by the pretty explosions and tense action.

I don't get why the story would be a motivational point, especially why it would be moreso that the statistical rewards

 

[MysticnFm]

A Game with only good gameplay can be good.

A Game with only a good storyline can be good.

However, a game with good gameplay AND a good storyline is great.

 

[Twad]

Its a number of things that when put together in a balanced and efficient whole, make a good game. Like a good sandwich. Of course, to each his favorite recipe, and to many a good story, well told, is essential.

 

[Danny Ocean]

I don't get why the story would be a motivational point, especially why it would be moreso that the statistical rewards

Stories motivate by giving characters an emotional significance. Because you care about the characters, you want to see them win. Or see them lose, if they're the baddie. Because you're now rooting for one side, any situations or confrontations they are involved in become more significant and more tense because you now have a reason to care if they live or die.

They are more important than statistical rewards because statistical rewards themselves are pointless without context. You've got 20,000 points. So what?

Yes there are games in which there is no story. Pac-man, Tetris, Pong, Various flash games, etc... and they are all addictive because of their simple gameplay. But tell me, do you play them again once you've exhausted every gameplay option? Found every star? Garnered every point?

I don't. I'm sure most people don't unless they have time to kill. I will, however, replay a game to experience a good story again, or to experience aspects of the same story that I had not noticed before.

Of course a good story is pointless without the gameplay, and visa versa. Take books: the most amazing story can be ruined by shoddy use language, and pure eloquence can't make up for a lack of plot. You need both.

 

[Acidwell]

You will find that nobody wants to spend hours talking about gameplay, but story? I have known people who talk for hours and hours discussing a good story.

Also thats like saying you read books to learn new words or watch movies to test your sight, i would definitely say you are one of about 3 people in the world who don't care about story at all.
For most people the story is the reason to go on, who cares if you pass the game. It isn't much of an achievement really considering that a lot of games these days have very similar gameplay and so many people complete them that it can't be called an achievement to pass them.

 

[Geamo]

where did you get the impression that i like shooters and Madden? I already said that I dont really like shooters and Madden I find flat out boring, along with all sports games of that kind

And why, pray tell, do you find Madden and the like boring? I would have thought it would appeal to your theory you're preaching, as they have little to no story and are just gameplay.

Likewise, stories give much more depth and meaning to a game.

Playing a game without the story is like watching Black Hawk Down without any dialogue. You have no idea what's going on, why they're there, why they're doing what they're doing, and no reason to want them to continue. You're just being amused by the pretty explosions and tense action. Action which is significantly less tense due to lack of significance.

This is is a pretty good analogy to describe it.

 

[Uncreation]

you PLAY GAMES for the GAMEPLAY.

No, YOU play games for the gameplay. Each person has their own reasons for playing games. I also play them for their storyline. Don't just assume everyone plays games for the gameplay (or story, or graphycs, or any one element for that matter).

 

[Josdeb]

I don't get why the story would be a motivational point, especially why it would be moreso that the statistical rewards

I have a hypothetical position for you:

Just say you're playing a random JRPG that, in hindsight was not appropriately designed or you decided to grind a lot before you hit the end of the game.

This game had good enough/great gameplay, but you've completely maxed your characters (You have the best weapons, accessories, etc and cannot in anyway improve your characters) and you're only 2/3rds of the way through!

Will you still keep playing to finish the storyline, or will you consider the game finished and stop playing?

 

[PxDn Ninja]

you PLAY GAMES for the GAMEPLAY.

See, this isn't ALWAYS true. I play most games for action and gameplay, but some good games I play for the story.

I can't imagine anyone saying they played Heavy Rain for the gameplay. I played that game STRICTLY for the story. The gameplay wasn't bad by any means, but it wasn't a factor. I played because I wanted to learn the story and see what happened.

 

[Hotshots]

What? Did you think mass effect one,got all those awards for its gamplay?