next »

[Melly]

Fixing it isn't hard to conceive, it's just hard to implement because it takes a LOT more effort than those mini-movies and walls of text do.

Making a linear, scripted plot epic and satisfying (as fairly rare as that may be lately in gaming) isn't nearly as challenging as doing the same with a plot that can branch in 5 different directions, and those 5 branches can branch into other 5, and so on. It requires far more time and writing talent to work with all of that while the publisher is nagging you to release the game in time for the summer rush so he can make his wallet fatter.

[William Broom]

I don't that combining gameplay and story automatically equals branching storyline. For example, games like Shadow of the Colossus and Half-Life 2 were strictly linear while also telling a story that was tightly bound to the gameplay.

Anyway, wasn't this thread originally going to be about specific settings or storylines you want to see? Because I want a game set in a world with no organic life, only robots. Kind of like that movie, Robots, only more dystopian and stuff.

[Melly]

I was also under the assumption Cake was gonna show some examples of his own ideas for game settings and stories.

[Gainsworthy]

Sorry to pop in with a slight tangent, but I have a somewhat unusual example for story-telling in the form of Metal Slug 3.

Silly as I may sound, as I played through the dialogueless- nay, textless game, I got a significant (but still basic) sense of atmosphere and story simply from character design, setting and progression. Despite the unconnected missions and the fact I knew that the Giant Crab, or the Alien Hive were probably put in simply because they're hella awesome, my mind started weaving up a back story. Not uh, in the sense of detail and character development, mind you. Tarma's great and all, but more the world's general history and enemy origins hinted at from visual aspects of the game.

Albeit, I had a fair bit of time- I adamantly refuse to spend that much money on a single arcade game in one sitting  .

ANYWAY. I guess what I'm getting at is that from my view, a game needs next to no written story to create atmosphere and a sense of history about itself, so long as the detail's still there. Some games with a reasonably poor written story still get me into the world on appearances alone.

This is to say nothing of Shadow of The Colossus- now that was on a whole other level of unspoken history and character development. I mean, really. Outdid all but the best written (video game) [his]stories in my eyes. Though by the looks of it, that's already been discussed.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

I agree with I Like Cake that the concept of "gameplay" is heuristic (i.e. it doesn't actually exist except as a way to explain something), and it doesn't even do a very good job of explaining that thing, but we can (and should) lay that criticism on "story" as well. I also dislike the fetish of gameplay; people think it actually exists and it's actually important, when it's just a fairly meaningless abstraction. What matters is the experience of playing the game, not the game's "story" or "gameplay".

I also dislike the idea that too much text is lazy and overbearing or that games with a lot of text should actually be books or movies. Some of the best games have a huge amount of text -- Xenogears reportedly had over 2000 pages, as did Planescape: Torment. While you *can* tell story without words, it's stupid to think that it's *superior* to tell story without words, because it doesn't fit the facts of what most people think are the games with the best stories (those games usually have a lot of text). I'd even say it's usually *better* to tell a story through text than through other means, simply because text usually gets the most across with the least amount of time and trouble, and is less tricky to use and less easily misinterpreted. It's a good idea to convey things in the most simple and clear manner you can, and sometimes that's through text.

[mewse]

I also dislike the fetish of gameplay; people think it actually exists and it's actually important, when it's just a fairly meaningless abstraction.

I must be misinterpreting or taking your statement out of context or something, but..  are you actually asserting that gameplay doesn't exist, and that even if it did exist, that it wouldn't be an important thing for a game to have?

[joshg]

I also dislike the fetish of gameplay; people think it actually exists and it's actually important, when it's just a fairly meaningless abstraction. What matters is the experience of playing the game, not the game's "story" or "gameplay".

Yeah, uh.  "Gameplay" is pretty much equivalent to "the experience of playing the game", so I don't get how you can say one sucks but the other is all-important.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

I think the two are distinct: gameplay as a concept refers to the rule-based part of a game, whereas the experience of playing the game includes everything, including how it looks, how it makes you feel, and so on. I.e. if I say nifflas's games had a great atmosphere and felt peaceful, that's part of the experience of playing the game, but that's not part of the gameplay.

[Mitchard]

That's pure semantics.

Call it the 'game mechanics' instead. Problem solved.

I also dislike the idea that too much text is lazy and overbearing or that games with a lot of text should actually be books or movies. Some of the best games have a huge amount of text -- Xenogears reportedly had over 2000 pages, as did Planescape: Torment. While you *can* tell story without words, it's stupid to think that it's *superior* to tell story without words, because it doesn't fit the facts of what most people think are the games with the best stories (those games usually have a lot of text). I'd even say it's usually *better* to tell a story through text than through other means, simply because text usually gets the most across with the least amount of time and trouble, and is less tricky to use and less easily misinterpreted. It's a good idea to convey things in the most simple and clear manner you can, and sometimes that's through text.

There's a time and place for large amounts of text and it's generally not video games.

At best it's an ineffective and clumsy way of conveying a story that's simply there to overcome the inherent limitations of the games themselves. It's just a bad place to put a book and as soon as more cinematic means of story telling were possible, gratuitous text was almost immediately dropped.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

I must be misinterpreting or taking your statement out of context or something, but..  are you actually asserting that gameplay doesn't exist, and that even if it did exist, that it wouldn't be an important thing for a game to have?

I mean that it's just a conceptual tool to think about games and one that people tend to be too beholden to, the extent that they forget that it's just an abstract concept.

To use an analogy, "gameplay" in games is like the idea of the "soul" in humans. It's a neat idea, and sometimes useful in a poetic sense, but it doesn't really exist.

And the reason I think it's problematic to believe that gameplay really exists or the soul really exists is that then you come to treat games or people as dualistic (composed of story, gameplay, and so on, or composed of a body and a soul) instead of as something whole or one.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

That's pure semantics.

Call it the 'game mechanics' instead. Problem solved.

I don't think that solves the problem because gameplay is not usually equivalent to game mechanics (for instance, level design might be part of the gameplay, but not part of the game mechanics), and even the concept of game mechanics still might cause people to think of games as a collection of parts (like in those old game magazine reviews: Graphics: 9, Story: 7, Controls: 6, Sound: 8 etc.)

[Mitchard]

I don't think that solves the problem because gameplay is not usually equivalent to game mechanics (for instance, level design might be part of the gameplay, but not part of the game mechanics), and even the concept of game mechanics still might cause people to think of games as a collection of parts (like in those old game magazine reviews: Graphics: 9, Story: 7, Controls: 6, Sound: 8 etc.)

Level design IS part of the game mechanics. That spike pit you have to jump over/that branching path/that impassable door/even that generic corridor are all part of the game mechanics, it all serves a purpose albeit a fairly abstract one.

This is still semantics. Gameplay and game mechanics are the same thing. Such loose concepts defy definition.

[joshg]

Skimming back over the thread for useful things I forgot to say...

One thing I'd love to see is more variety of setting - skip the usual generic fantasy or generic sci-fi and mix things up.  Fallout comes to mind as a classic example.  The story itself was interesting too, but in a way which really came naturally out of the weird choice of setting and background plot.

So, specifically I'd love to see more serious treatment of post-apocalyptic stuff.  But in general I think there's also a lot to be said for putting a weird twist on the setting and seeing how that twist would affect an otherwise cliche story.

[Thorst]

This thread is going in different directions at once.

Regarding what kind of story I would like to see in a game, I say romantic comedy in a contemporary setting.

Regarding the meaning of story as opposed to gameplay, how about a distinction between sensation and action?  In adventure games, for example, you are either performing the action of trying to solve a puzzle, or you are sensing the storyline through scripted dialog and animation.  Action and sensation are separate.

So, to me, gameplay, game mechanics, or whatever you call it consists of actions.  The game presents a challenge, which the player's action resolves.

Stories are sensations.  You sit back and take them in.  Stories can and should be relevant to the gameplay, but they are naturally perceived separately.

The biggest challenge that I see to this view, however, is in the way our brains comprehend and use stories.  It has been pointed out in this thread that we use stories or narratives to rationalize action.  Conversely, it takes the action of the imagination to comprehend a story.  Stories do not, in fact, just fly off the page and into our minds.

Nevertheless, I am at a loss to name a game in which the nature of the mechanics or the challenge revealed something about the story.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

I don't think it's just semantics actually. If it were just arguing over definitions of words it would be semantics, but my point is not the definition, but that defining gameplay and story as separate things at all is a bad idea because the two are as intertwined as a person's body and mind, and the distinction between the two is imaginary. In reality, gameplay is story, story is gameplay.

[mewse]

I don't think it's just semantics actually. If it were just arguing over definitions of words it would be semantics, but my point is not the definition, but that defining gameplay and story as separate things at all is a bad idea because the two are as intertwined as a person's body and mind, and the distinction between the two is imaginary. In reality, gameplay is story, story is gameplay.

It's semantics because your assertion that gameplay and story are the same thing only works with your definition of the word "gameplay". 


Really, I think we're all in violent agreement.  It's just that the terms "gameplay" and "game mechanics" are somewhat sloppy terms that seem to mean different things to different people.

Whether or not you claim that they're the same thing as story, I'm going to go out on a limb and claim that it's useful to have a term which refers only to the mechanical actions actually undertaken by the player, separate from how those actions are themed/storied in the game.  Having a term like that is very important so that we can talk about human factors in the design of those actions.

As a simple example, it's very important to be able to discuss the actions that the player performs with a Wii Remote, and how those map to on-screen actions, without having to simultaneously talk about the game's storyline.  If you're adamant that you don't want to use "gameplay" or "game mechanics" for that purpose, then we need to figure out a different word for it. 

Any suggestions?


In terms of stories I'd like to see..  Yes, romantic comedy would be interesting.  I don't believe I've ever seen one of those in a game.  Except perhaps for Plundered Hearts, again by Infocom.  That was kind of a romantic comedy on the high seas.  Anybody notice how often I reference Infocom?  Bit scary, really. 

I'd love to see another Lovecraft-style quietly menacing game (Lurking Horror).  Good mysteries are in short supply at the moment (Deadline, Witness, etc).  And really, I want a buddy game.  There've been a couple attempts at those recently, but.. nothing that really seemed to have the charm of the old buddy movies.

Anyhow, while I'm on an Infocom kick, I'll point at "A Mind Forever Voyaging" as a game where the gameplay mechanics revealed something about the story.  Brilliantly done and almost puzzleless piece where the player is cast as a self-aware computer which has been built to determine the likely outcome of "The Plan", a particular politician's grand vision for reforming society.  You descend into your projected future world, record slices of life, and return to show them to the scientists so that they can evaluate the likely outcomes of The Plan.

[William Broom]

I'd quite like to see a fantasy pirate WRPG. Pretty much every WRPG features pirates anyway, so it would be quite simple to create a story where one of them is the main character. But for heaven's sake, don't force the player to get embroiled in a dark plot to destroy the world. Nothing ruins a good anti-hero like saving the world. The story structure should be more like GTA. It can still come to a definite conclusion, but not a "CAST TEH RING INTO TEH FIAR!!!" sort of conclusion.

Instead of a party you would have a hand-picked crew. There would be hundreds, maybe thousands of crew members to pick from, but most of them are just deckhands and are fairly similar to each other, just with different stats. These deckhands could still participate in conversations and level up. But for special positions like first mate, navigator, ship's mage and so on, each character would be unique, just like the good old Black Isle games. And of course you could treat your crew well or badly, which would affect both story and gameplay. Just like in the good old Black Isle games.

Nowhere would be safe from your piracy. With the right equipment, you could fly your ship into space and ransack the moon, sail through a portal to the Elemental Plane of Water, dive into the ocean to raid undersea Kraken worshippers, and so on.

[Gnarf]

I think this is a fairly good read. That like, talks about stories in games and things.

[something overly pretentious about the essence of story and/or gameplay]

[Corpus]

Uhh, if it's overly pretentious, why are you recommending it? Sounds like your covering yourself.

Why are people so afraid of perceived pretension? This will always be a mystery to me.

Anyway, I think the fact that so many people have so many different ideas of what the hell "gameplay" actually is is a pretty good reason to agree with what I Like Cake and Rinku were saying. Besides, "gameplay" generally DOESN'T just mean "the experience of playing the game," because people are always saying things like, "the story was rubbish, but the gameplay was excellent." Clearly, the story is an important factor in the player's experience of the game.

[Gnarf]

Sorry about that. It was meant more like "insert something overly pretentious yaddayadda here."

And, well. Whether or not everything is story or gameplay is story is gameplay or, something... the game being saved and loaded isn't a part of the story of how Gordon Freeman saved the world from aliens[1]. It is part of the gameplay though. It changes the way you play the game. You can still call it story, I suppose. Part of game-being-played story. Personally I'd me more comfortable discussing it if we called it a game mechanic, and, pretty much like mewse said, sometimes a distinction there is quite meaningful.


[1] I've no idea what goes on in them Half Life games.