next »

[z84c00]

Hi All,

I guess it's a bit nebulous to ask but do stories add anything? I guess it depends on the type of game but from a personal point of view, I really just don't care about them. Click through the text as fast as I can..

Thoughts?

-Z8

[zacaj]

They're the only reason I play at all.  If they're not pretty good...  quit and go to the next game

[Wilson Saunders]

The best stories in games are the ones the user makes them selves, the ones the designer may have set up but didn't explicitly create. For example:

There was this one time I was running the flag back to base with virtually no health. Some guy a long way off was plinking down my health with a chain gun hitting one out of every 20 bullets. I knew I would be dead in about 5 secconds when I see the contrail of a rail gun pass by my character. The chain gun falls silent and I check the kill log to see that one of my team's snipers made a masterful kill shot half way across the level.

[jiitype]

If it's not a visual novel or some other game like that... not really, but sometimes story can enhance the overall experience. In Metal Gear Solid the story is half the fun.

[Olsen]

Depends what you mean by "story" in games.  It comes in many forms and we're still trying to work out the best method for delivery or even if there is a "best"

Metal Gear, Last of Us follow a linear path that is dictated to you with an almost 60/40 split in cutscene to gameplay. Half Life also follows a linear path but you never break control.  Witcher gives you choice within linear paths etc etc

Minecraft has no dictation of story but you create your own through discovery and consequence.

I could go on and on with how many different methods of delivering narrative in games but in the end it's down to personal taste.  I see games having the biggest scope for evolution in the "make your own" story but I feel there will always be a place for every type.  I for one can appreciate almost all methods and when perfectly synergised with contextual gameplay it hits a sweet spot for me.

[Schoq]

A game needs a story like a song needs lyrics.

[s0]

Depends what you mean by "story" in games.  It comes in many forms and we're still trying to work out the best method for delivery or even if there is a "best"

yeah stories in games are much more than just cutscenes and dialog. i mean for instance, every game where the goal is to get to the end of a level (or get as far as possible in a level) uses a type of narrative structure.

i used to be very anti-story until i realized its a fundamental aspect of many games and many games can be understood in terms of narrative.

[Canned Turkey]

A narrative is not necessarily what we consider to be a classical "story".
I mean, most games don't have what we think of when we think of the word story, but yes, games do need a driving narrative.
One of my favorite indie games, knytt, has almost no "story", but it involves the player by explaining the world and characters.
Some games have what you would call a story, like adventure games. There's named places and characters, and those characters have a goal, and things happen for explained reasons. But relaying these concepts with things other than text doesn't mean a game lacks a story.
If we took away anything we could call a story from even the most complicated game, it would just be a bunch of squares doing things for no reason and with no goal. There would be nothing to drive the player to make choices, and nothing could show meaningful advancement in any way.
To answer your question, a game doesn't need to be written for a story, which is what people think of when you say "story driven game", but every game does need some form of narrative told either through text or feedback to show the player what's happening.

[oahda]

Depends on the intentions of the developer and the possibilities at hand. What do you wish to convey? Can it be done without a story? If so, maybe you don't need one. Maybe you do.

Do you just want to make a game to kill some time (Flappy Bird) or train the brain (escape the room; sudoku)? You probably don't need one.

If you want to, well, tell a story, then you obviously need one.

Do you want to criticise something? Politics? Racism? The meat industry? That might be easier to do with story elements. Getting the player to feel for a character or something else usually requires a bit of building that character up and that usually requires a story.

You seem to be asking from a player's perspective rather than a designer's perspective, tho, OP. You don't like playing games with stories. Isn't this a pretty moot point from your perspective then? Your dislike of stories is subjective and personal to you. No, games don't need stories if you and people like you don't like them – obviously not. But some people do like them and want them and games for them do need them. The answer remains no. Stories are not necessary. But they're not unnecessary either. I want stories and you don't. My games need them and you don't. It's... simple as that.

But do note what has been said above. Story or narrative doesn't have to be text at all, or there may be very little text coupled with other means. I think Brothers might be a good example of this, where Fares found it important to convey as much through physical interactions and gestures as possible instead. You control both brothers and what they are going through is happening right in front of your eyes and you don't have to be told about it in text.

[Rarykos]

Do you just want to make a game to kill some time (Flappy Bird) or train the brain (escape the room; sudoku)? You probably don't need one.

I might be wrong but doesn't Flappy Bird have a narrative? If you wanted to get rid of any resemblance of story and narrative what would be left is a timer with flashing lights whenever you should tap - the pure mechanic. And that narrative is what makes a huge difference (and makes Flappy Bird so popular) because now it's a bird avoiding stuff , not an abstract activity like sudoku with only the main mechanic and absolutely nothing else.


Great responses everyone!

[vinheim3]

I wouldn't call that a narrative, just a visual representation of the mechanics, stylized based on the creator. The same way some of the same puzzle games have different visual representations from different people.

As for my 2 cents, I don't think mechanically simple games need stories, but everything else can benefit from it. It gives meaning to your adventuring and progression, and can give the game a unique charm that sets it apart from other similar games.

I used to hate the strong focus of stories, though I think it's because they're sometimes awful. Video games as a visual medium can tell stories in its own unique ways compared to other forms of art as it connects with the player more through input, but it's just a case of using the right tricks like QTEs in MGR boss fights, the final battle of Crisis Core, branching stories like in Tales of Symphonia based on your actions, etc, and then as if with other visual mediums, just make sure the script isn't bad, that it's well voice acted if there's voice acting and that setpieces and cinematography is given some focus too, and the general plot leaves you wanting more, and that would show just why story and more importantly storytelling is important in video games and can improve them.

[Nikira Bam!]

If the game is centered around a certain mechanic, it can work without a story. Take Pong for example. It's perfectly fine without a narrative. But our brains tend to make up their own stories if the games don't supply any.

Besides, if a game has a narrative, it has an inherent conflict, a motivation for me to care and keep playing.

[teefal]

We use digital storytelling as a way to get children involved in tech in places like Haiti and Nicaragua.  When we teach them, we break stories down into:

1. who - the characters in the story
2. where & when - the setting of the story
3. what - the essential conflict of the story
4. how - the way the characters resolve the conflict

Applied to games, the who (Super Meat Boy) and where (Mushroom Kingdom) are nearly always supplied.  The when usually relates to genre, as in Mass Effect or Assassin's Creed. The conflict can be simple (Bowser kidnaps Peach) or multi-layered (Mass Effect), with each conflict having one or more how's (ways to resolve).

All games need a conflict (goal) and resolution (gameplay).  Stories become more important when the complexity of the conflicts increase ... when it's not simply "beat this level" or "kill everything you see."   Stories are usually pointless in those cases, as in games like Diablo, which result in much "click past the text".

Personally, I need more story than pure gameplay.  Games like Diablo bore the hell out of me.

[J-Snake]

Stories become more important when the complexity of the conflicts increase ... when it's not simply "beat this level" or "kill everything you see."   Stories are usually pointless in those cases

That's how I feel too. But stories can still work as a tool to set up the theme and mood.

[Schoq]

this was published today and relevant I guess

[ThemsAllTook]

Click through the text as fast as I can..

Are you thinking only of games that pause gameplay to show you dialogue? There are a lot more ways than that to tell a story, some of which don't slow you down at all. How do you feel about those?

[DeRoquefeuille]

this was published today and relevant I guess

I agree with a lot that is said in this errant signal, but I don't get why "Ludonarrative Dissonance" should, or is already beeing faded out as a term used by critics.

He argues, that the term is about the "games as systems" vs "games as narratives" debate and relates it to talking about a films story and a films cinematography seperately and not about the movie as a whole.

But isn't the term "Ludonarrative Dissonance" used to criticise exactly that - how good the game works as a whole?
I would even say "Ludonarrative Dissonance" makes no sense when not seeing the game as a whole and as an interplay between a narrative and a system.

[s0]

But isn't the term "Ludonarrative Dissonance" used to criticise exactly that - how good the game works as a whole?
I would even say "Ludonarrative Dissonance" makes no sense when not seeing the game as a whole and as an interplay between a narrative and a system.

agreed. i also think its weird that he claims the problem is that we "frame" games that way, when imo the real problem is that a lot of games (entire genres in fact) are DESIGNED that way. you can't fault people for thinking of "story" and "gameplay" as completely different things when they just plain ARE in many many games.

also the film comparison is weak i think. very few films have the kind of extreme separation between different "elements" that e.g. your average jrpg or modern FPS has and when they do it's usually criticized.

[valrus]

Yeah, even if the "ludo-" and "narrative" distinction is a distinction without a difference, it's still the case that a lot of games try to "tell" two conflicting stories.  Even if we don't believe that there's a genuine distinction, we can still play a game and feel "Hey, something's wrong here", and when we investigate, we keep finding player action and non-gameplay narrative looking sheepish and not meeting our gaze.

also the film comparison is weak i think. very few films have the kind of extreme separation between different "elements" that e.g. your average jrpg or modern FPS has and when they do it's usually criticized.

There was an interesting talk (I thought a GDC talk but I can't find it) about very early films, and how they had something like this problem.  Filmmakers didn't really know yet about what sort of emotional effects different aspects of filmmaking had, or didn't really put much thought into it.  Actually planning it out, so that the different "elements" had convergent effects, didn't happen until a little later.  The suggestion was that that's sort of where we are now in games.  (Which I don't think is the real problem, but it was an interesting talk nonetheless.)

[gimymblert]

Ludo narrative is as important to discuss as framing and editing is to cinema, criic can tell when a frame is wrong and tell a different story than it should, and they do, a lot, when there is a bad movie, pointing at plot hole, mis edit frame and transitio, why? they detract because we notice them.

I'm sure someone with a better English can come and use the correct term i'm dancing around to make my point