Why is a good story such an important factor in games to this community?

[Flames66]

A good story in a game is very important to me. If it's a flash game like bloons or a classic puzzle game like Tetris then I agree that a story would just be superfluous. With shooters and games involving death there almost always must be a story.

It is not enough to say this is enemy, shoot enemy. I have to have a reason to kill these enemies. If you don't have a reason to kill people but do it anyway then you are just a psychopath (not calling gamers psychopaths, I'm talking about my immersion in the story).

It is quite rare with most games that I will play them online because no one plays properly. Online shooters are turned into one big running and gunning reflex test while in the good old RTS all anyone does is build the most powerful unit they can over and over and rush each other with it. There are no tactical advances, taking cover and returning fire.

I love a good single player game with a compelling story that I can loose myself in and become my character.

 

[SamFancyPants252]

It all comes down to personal preference in games. If you want a racing game, go buy Gran Turismo. Games aren't about their plots, plots or storylines just come into it. Most of the time, however, the storyline makes the game better or worse...so it factors in the enjoyment overall.

 

[r0manz]

Ehh, I disagree with the OP. Whilst certain genres don't make sense to have an epic story, like racing games, I like to feel that there is an actual reason for all of the killing (in shooters) and especially in RPGs (I laughed when you mentioned FF) a story is necessary. It does come down to personal preference though.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Since my favourite genre is action adventure, the story and characters are pretty damn important.

It's also these things that compels me to replay a game even if it's 5 or 10 years old.

 

[The Rockerfly]

le snip

Granted, for example Final Fantasy, actually 99% of all JRPGs would be boring without a story but surely the main focus of a game is it's gameplay?

 

[TelHybrid]

and especially in RPGs (I laughed when you mentioned FF)

I never classed Final Fantasy as an RPG. It's a turn based strategy game with RPG elements.

 

[CyberGenesis]

I like my games to be entertaining and not have a 6hr gameplay for a $70 cost. Pretty is nice, but i'd rather play Dwarf Fortress than buy a game just for the multiplayer.

 

[Downfall89]

I've noticed so so so many comments commenting that storyline is of major importance in games. I fail to see the logic of this.

I thought they were meant video games... not interactive movies.

Sure I enjoy games like Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid a fair bit, but I know for a fact that storylines aren't a key factor all in games.

Take Pokémon Red/Blue for instance. Fairly simple plot. Classic and cliché. The game was absolutely awesome though.

Take Driving games like Forza or Gran Turismo. How the hell would a story work with those games?

Am I the only one starting to get irratated with people obsessing over storylines in games? I find them even more annoying than graphics whores... seriously.

Your thoughts...

Edit: see bold

Why do you think it's a large factor in a game? I think it's like saying Why are graphics an important factor of a game.

EDIT: O.T Because storyline's are important and can make low budget games incredibly fun and worthwhile.

 

[HuntrRose]

A good story in a game is very important to me. If it's a flash game like bloons or a classic puzzle game like Tetris then I agree that a story would just be superfluous. With shooters and games involving death there almost always must be a story.

It is not enough to say this is enemy, shoot enemy. I have to have a reason to kill these enemies. If you don't have a reason to kill people but do it anyway then you are just a psychopath (not calling gamers psychopaths, I'm talking about my immersion in the story).

It is quite rare with most games that I will play them online because no one plays properly. Online shooters are turned into one big running and gunning reflex test while in the good old RTS all anyone does is build the most powerful unit they can over and over and rush each other with it. There are no tactical advances, taking cover and returning fire.

I love a good single player game with a compelling story that I can loose myself in and become my character.

Don't you just hate it when people ninja your opinions?

 

[achilleas.k]

To the people agreeing with the OP:
Listing games that work well without a story does not prove that stories are not an important factor in games. They do show that games can work and be good without a story. As others have mentioned, puzzle games, sports games, racing games etc. don't need a story and no one would disagree with you on that.

A game and an "interactive movie" are indeed two different things, but having a plot to follow in a game does not turn it into the latter.
Electronic RPGs evolved from pen & paper RPGs. Without a story, the original RPG would be a more complicated version of Craps. Without a story, the electronic RPG would be a beat 'em up where you get money from people you kill and spend it on weapons.

I'd have to say story is of great importance in modern games because most modern games are little more than interactive movies.
...
Good story is important because its all we really have anymore. Every genre has been boiled down to its most accessible elements, and every new "innovation" seeks only to further simplify.

I disagree. Stories in modern games have become more tied to the game itself, while in the old days it was just something that lingered in the background to satisfy the people who were wondering where the giant octopus with the laser firing eyeball came from. However, I don't find the current state of story-heavy games a bad thing.

Consider point & click adventures. Everyone who was playing games back in those days loves them. Those games are the true "interactive movies". Sure, there were puzzles to solve and some had alternate endings, but in the end you were just clicking at a scenery hoping your next click would advance the story.

The reason more and more games look alike these days is because there are more games coming out in general, and I don't think that's a bad thing. It's only natural that since a medium has become popular, developers are going to put out more and more games knowing they can turn a profit even if they can sell games to just 5% of the target audience. This is only bad if developers who release cheap, bad games could have made brilliant ones in an alternate universe where only brilliant ones profit.

As for the original topic, I am a big fan of story heavy games. A great story with good characters can turn a nice, intelligent puzzle game into Portal (see? I can list games too). Portal without GLaDOS would be good; with her, it's brilliant. As for the people on the other side of the argument though, listing games and genres that can use a story doesn't prove that a story is a necessary factor, just that it has its place in the gaming world.

A story's importance to the experience is different for each player. For me, it's very important, when the game can support it. A story can also break a game, let's not forget about that. However I like having a story so much that even when the game type doesn't need it, I enjoy it more, because it gives me purpose, a goal to look forward to, a way of knowing that I *beat* the game. Tower defence games don't need stories, I loved "Defense Grid: The Awakening" though because there was a continuity among levels and a nice chap talking to me while I was playing. Racing games don't need stories either. I enjoyed having an end goal and a natural progression in "Need For Speed Underground (II)" and "Most Wanted" though, even though they were far from the best racing games.

 

[Neonic-Ink]

I agree that with the games likes driving, music, fpsing, and such, you really don't need a story to get put into the action.

But let's take the Silent Hill franchise for a second to give an example of why a good story is needed.
Silent Hill 1: You get a feel and sense that Silent Hill is not a good place to be and you get a little bit of the back story of why the town is like that. Monsters are connected to one of the main characters fears and memories and you feel like everything is going to get you.
Silent Hill 2: In my opinion and a lot of other people's, the best Silent Hill game. The graphics sucked, the fighting sucked, but the story was so well put together that it was the only thing that motivated a lot of people from the beginning to end of the game.

Now we go on... Silent Hill 3: Good, Silent Hill 4, Good.
And then Silent Hill Origins.. Holy crap. The story, was okay, it wasn't the greatest.. and the concepts in the game we a a bit, well, cheesy.. but overall, eh..

And then Homecoming comes along... fans are expecting a creepy walk around alone.. trying to find your way out of your own personal hell.. not "I WAS FROM THE MILITARY, FIGHTING IS WHAT I DO BEST. SCREW THESE MONSTERS!" All of what fans loved best of the game they love, gone, because they are trying to appeal to those who don't want or feel need a story line. And that's what they got with Homecoming. An action game, with survival horror elements.

So, all in all... I guess that people get snippy about the story, because action/no point games are becoming the bigger demographic and are ruining their favored game franchises.

To each his own.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

I personally love a good story and I won't play a game in any of my preferred genres if there is no story at all, which is one of the many reasons I dislike multiplayer. I can handle a story not being very good, as long as the gameplay is fun, but I do need some underlining plot otherwise everything I do in a game feels pointless and I have no interest in advancing further. Also, If the story isn't very good, I hold it as one of the main cons of the experience. It's just personal taste.

The only genre I play that doesn't involve a story are Racing Games, because I like the sense of speed and rush I get from them, but I tend to only play them in short bursts because the lack of any real story and only a basic progression system makes me lose interest very quickly.

Games like Tetris, PacMan and Frogger bore the shit out of me too, after about 5 minutes of playing them. If gaming had never advanced enough to the point where the story can become a main part of the experience, I would not be a gamer.

So you see, it's just about personal taste. Some people need or want a story, some people don't need or want a story and can be happy just blowing stuff up with little to no purpose. Sometimes I envy those people, because to me, decent gameplay alone can only hold my interest for a very short time; and I reckon this is why I'm becoming so very picky with games and agreeing with Yahtzee more and more.

 

[001648]

story to me is important..
with a story we can have character development, behaviors and emotions all together can draw a player close to his character,
giving a real sense of being that character!

 

[BattlePope]

Uh, dude.

The site is called "theescapist." As in, escapism. As in... stories.

Amen to that! And in regards to the original poster: Video games are expected to be interactive movies when they're done right!

I would have to say that the only reason why most people loved, say... Silent Hills 1 & 2 is because of the story it told about a town that literally hates you just for being a tourist, the gameplay was frantic and unrealistically difficult on easy at some points, sure, but would you care nearly as much about those two games if the story or setting (which more often than not is an extension of the story) wasn't as scary as career politics?
I wanted to see what would happen to these characters, and felt an empathetic response what was happening these people trapped in that creepy town. And the stories started to jump the shark as the graphics evolved, but guess what: people still bought it, because they thought the stories were going to be as great as the last two!

And in the same vein: We played the Sands of Time Trilogy (or at least the first 2) because of THE STORY! Gameplay was in fact, great, but the new revamp on the latest gen wasn't nearly as fun due it being a rehashing with smoother gameplay and almost nothing but QTE's, so it was actually that it was a been there done that affair in addition to game design not just becoming dumbed down, but lobotomized and then hit in the head with a tire iron.

The reason people even bought or considered buying "The Thing" on the Xbox or PS2 was because it was promised to be the continuation of a great story. And how many times do I have to hear that Gears of War has a great story before it's proven to not be so!? Do I have to come up with some sort of mathematic formula to prove such?!!!

 

[JoGribbs]

If a game has a story then it's open to be criticised for it. If a designer somewhere has sat down and said 'our game absolutely needs a story to function' then it's important enough for people to criticize or celebrate.

That's my opinion anyway.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Some games are simply more engaging and immersive with a good story. (i.e. Bioware stuff)

And some are just fun to play and don't need one. (i.e. Street Fighter 4)

 

[Zhukov]

A good story with good characters increases the enjoyment for me. That simple.

Sure, I'll still play a run of the mill explosion-fest like, say, Red Faction Guerilla and, so long as the game doesn't go out of its way to rub its bad writing in my face, I'll probably still have fun. But those are cheap thrills when compared to the likes of BioShock and Half-Life.