I can't possibly understand how the author can claim, as it appears they are, that games have fallen short wholeheartedly in the storytelling department. Sure, there are individual games that have a crappy story, but what matters is that there are many, many games with EXCELLENT and engaging storylines.
How about the centuries spanning story of the Assassin's Creed franchise? That alone debunks the foundation of this article. The story was magnificent, utterly unique, engaging, and everything the author says is absent from games.
There are a plethora of games out there that have incredible storylines that leave me frantic to know what happens next. Titles such as Grand Theft Auto IV, The Force Unleashed (not so much the second expansion pack, uhh, I mean sequel), even Enter the Matrix, for all the crap it got, told a great story. How about God of War, a perfectly crafted Greek tragedy? What about Heavy Rain? The complaint with GTAIV the author gives is that there were supposed "gaps" because the game had to take time to let the player fill in what happens . . which is exactly what a good game should do with its story. Games are about giving the player control, and the author seems to not like that.
I get the impression what the author is looking for they will never find in a game, and shouldn't expect to. His claim that linear experiences are more in line with his expectations illuminates this quite well. He directly cites less control offering a story more in line with what his expectations for what a game story should be. What the author seems to want is a movie where the buttons he presses just happens to make the story on on the screen progress exactly like someone else, the game developer\writer, wanted it to go down. Basically, he wants a game that removes everything that makes it a game. Allow me to make an analogy and show what the author would have complained about where they someone living in the 1930's and lamenting the experience of the movies compared to how books are:
"I loved reading books and letting my imagination run wild. I'd picture all these wonderful exotic locations and heroic action sequences. My parents, however, thought that movies would be detrimental to me, so they never let me go see any. I really wanted to experience a movie and get that same fascination and wonderment I got from a book, only from the screen. I was really disappointed when I saw a movie, and found that my imagination wasn't the driving force. It was hard to picture the sword fight the way I wanted to when they showed me what it looked like on the screen. Every time I wanted to imagine something, the movie would just keep on going to the next part. While I was still visually engaged and enjoyed everything on screen, what a movie offers is fundamentally different from what a book offers, and that isn't right. Maybe someday movies will find some way to tell their story without so many of those pesky visuals that keep getting in the way."
Forgive the sarcasm, but I feel it is appropriate. While many games have told their stories poorly, so many have succeeded in every way imaginable. The Force Unleashed was a very positively viewed game, but not really for the gameplay. Many reviewers, of whom I disagree with, found the gameplay rather shoddy but cited the STORY as what made the game so good. This example alone debunks entirely the authors claims.
There are great stories in video games that can give you just as much satisfaction and engagement as the greatest epic in a book or movie. It's just not going to be the same experience as a book or movie, because it isn't a book or movie.
