Storytelling in Games Thread

Carrying the discussion here since it deserves a topic of its own

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClockHand

Writers are the last people videogame companies call, even more, no game is going to be build under a story (it will always be under a game mechanic), this is why (in my opinion) video games are still pretty far away in story telling than movies or books (you can say you have the same level of satisfaction, but the whole story was of minor importance for the developers and as a game is based on reactions-goals-rewards you are very limited in what you can bring to the story).

With video games being open-ended or just one lineal story, that is a situation where the writers are forced to work constantly, and I think one has advantages the other doesn't. A lineal story let you work the characters, their psychology, archetypes and enneatypes in the story, it gave circularity to the events and it can be nice to play, but this eliminate from picture the ability of the player to play as he want, because he is subject of a story. In the other case we have open ended games, these eliminate the psychology and function of the characters but let the player to chose how he want to play and what kind of end he want.

For my both can live together, and I hope so, because I don't want to be playing only games with open ended with no characters (as I chose how Shepard will react I change who is Shepard and even more, it can create incongruence on who he is, and changing events in the story also affect the importance of the characters; if I'm a asshole Shepard maybe the character that should betray me, shouldn't be the same as if I were a good Shepard), but I neither want to be playing lineal games with no space for my own goals.

Maybe there are some options: one would be creating the story in some way that the player feel the need to act as the hero should act, letting the player chose, but he will always be pulled in how the character would do it. A second way would be through second game play, the first one would be the story, but the second would be the classic "what if", bringing re-playability to the game and giving to people the chance to make their own ending.

I dunno, I think both can live together.

---

What about games that are based off of stories to begin with? Amnesia, Metro 2033. There are a few exceptions you know. Amnesia is bit choice based if that's what we're still talking about, but still linear in a sense I guess.

Idk about amnesia but metro made a ton of concessions to make it work as a game.

Yea true...but it worked.

"9 hours 9 persons 9 doors" is an interesting game to look at in this discussion. I haven't got the real ending yet so no one spoil it for me, but so far it's been a thrill, and this coming from someone who was convinced he'd never play an interacting-novel video game.

ME3 is confirmed to have several events and overall endings that can be veeeery different from the others, since it's the final installment and they don't have to wrap up the ending to fit into the next chapter. Jaibutt's and mine's's games are probably going to work under that adaption.

So, in conclusion, there are two niche types of story-telling games right now and both are missing integral parts of the story-telling experience.

But I still think, in a game built around options, the option to do what you need to progress should be available without subtracting from its substance. A game shouldn't be so reliant on filler quests and such that the player feels cheated if they DON'T take them. So, while linear games are limiting, the focus is in the right place. I'd rather play a game that's like "hey, play this game and automatically get 50 hours worth of gaming" as opposed to "hey, play this game a certain way and get 50 hours worth of gaming, but if you play a different way you may only get 10."

What rpgs did you play that you felt had a good enough story to warrant 40+ hours of it out of curiosity

Persona 3 and 4, Valkyrie Profile, Secret of Mana, Kingdom Hearts I, Earthbound (maybe not "good" per se, but very captivating), Bahamut Lagoon, Tales of Phantasia, FF Tactics Advanced, Chrono Trigger, FFX, Golden Sun II, and a handful more.

And the thing is I'd usually muscle through these games without grinding. I hate grinding. Grinding is actually the reason I didn't include Vagrant Story, Digital Devil Saga, early SMT games, etc, etc.

Ironically enough, that's exactly why I liked Panzer Dragoon Saga better than most other RPGs, even through it was really quite easy. :p

Anyway. For the most part, I agree with what you said in the other thread. Alot of American games certainly have strong settings, but not stories, per say... Look at Fallout 3; Immerse as hell, and filled with all sorts of hidden background material, but ultimately just a bit shoddy when it comes to the actual beginning and ends of the self-contained plot.

Does being immerse count just as much towards being 'art value' as having a strong story is?...