274: Spoiled Rotten

[Hexley]

Spoilers can destroy and experience for me. Having something spoiled before the first time I've experienced it is completely different than when I go back and experience a second time. The second time I played through Bioshock I got to appreciate all the subtle things that were strewn about leading up to the surprise twist, and my appreciation of these subtleties was amplified by the fact that I get to see them through the perspective of someone who got to have the surprise realization that the creators intended.

Because I was already invested in the game seeing the subtleties in my second play through meant that much more to me rather than seeing them as someone who had never played the game before and just being able to point them out.


I also think that spoilers remove the intended impact that the creator of a piece of art is trying to convey. When someone is writing out a story ( especially one involving twists of some kind ) they are doing it with the impression that they are going to typically be conveying it to a person who won't see it coming. They are trying to weave the emotional impact the tale has on a person, and spoilers can completely break what they are trying to do.

 

[justjrandomuser]

I have to disagree with you on this. When you reveal a spoiler to someone you are essentially stealing from them (unless they want to know). You are correct that sometimes knowing something can actually enrich the experience, but I am free to embrace this experience at anytime. Once told however I can never again experience that aspect and all the choices that stemmed from not knowing. You essentially "forced" an experience with a game on me that you want me to have.

You acknowledge in your article that "the knowledge" in question can influence game play and so equally can the lack of that knowledge. If someone chooses to check out a spoiler do I think it detracts from their own game play? Sure, but the importance of that knowledge differs from person to person. Some people buy a game, grab the cheats and run through the entire game in god mode. Many people would view it as a boring waste of time, but I wouldn't advocate removing the cheats to force people to play the way I feel they should play.

When you take away someones choice you are stealing something unique and wonderful that can never be given back.

 

[justjrandomuser]

It's funny but when I bought Dragon Age I played through it several times exploring all kinds of different options. Overall I would say I probably got over 80 hours of enjoyment out of it. By contrast my brother later picked up a copy of Dragon Age for the PC (having never played it). He played it normally for about an hour or so before checking online grabbing the console cheats and modding his character to level of supreme being.

After employing his cheats he probably played a sum total of 4 more hours and never even neared completing the game. What he fails to realize is that key aspect of a game is some sort of challenge. When you have nothing to lose or gain the battle is meaningless after the novelty wears off. All total his $60.00 purchased him 6 hours of entertainment.

When we are children we dream about being adults and having the power to get the things we want. When our age out paces our maturity we become so enamored with the destination of gratification that we forget about the pleasure of the journey.

 

[Necromancer1991]

Ok so I knew how KOTOR ended before I got to the big reveal

Spoiler

You are Darth Reven

most would say that knowing the twist before-hand ruins it but IMO if I can guess a reveal HOURS before it comes up, I'm looking at your Rouge Galaxy, than it's generally a "well obviously!" moment anyway. Like when one of the guys from THE AMBIGUOUSLY GAY DUO reveals that he is in fact gay.

 

[The Random One]

I think the best point has already been made. If you know the spoiler you can still have a nice experience. If you don't, you can have two different nice experiences. I'll take the latter any day.

There's a certain confusion between plot twists and gameplay twists in here. Gameplay twists really aren't that important. I flipped out when I read that you turn into a colossus at the end of SotC (seriously, what the fuck?) not because I was thinking, 'oh no the gameplay will change!' but because of what it meant to the character. Gameplay twists are commonplace, every vehicle section is one. Plot twists are not.

The problem is that making a good story is hard, so game writers often stick in a plot twist to give the players the illusion that they're watching a good story with several layers when they're actually watching a 'You see, we all live in a jar of Tang!' story. There's a difference between a plot twist and a non-comical punchline and game writers can't seem to see it.

To drive the point home, here's a game no one mentioned: Portal. GladOs being an evil thing is no spoiler because it turns up early on, right? Wrong. The fact that she's not quite well in the digital head analogue is slowly delivered through the game, and because I knew he was supposed to be funny and kept expecting her to deliver the funny one-liners I had read about while the game was still setting her up she had a lot less of an impact to me, until her true nature was revealed and my expectations matched to what the game thought they were. And yet most players wouldn't say this is a plot twist, and they'd be right - the game never goes around and says 'GladOs is nice OH PSYCHE' but he lets you assume that then pulls the rug out from under you. Because I didn't know that (and didn't even know I had to assume it) the experience was lessened. That's what spoiler kills, not the cheap punchline.

And as for him saying that video games weren't meant to tell a story? That they're meant for the player to tell their own story? In all honesty? Fuck that guy. Fuck him and everything he stands for. The amount of games that really allow a player to tell their own story are slim to none.

Oh no. You didn't just say 'fuck you' to Dwarf Fortress on my watch. Allow me to crank the anger to eleven.

The reason there are few games that let you tell your own story is not because that's not a good way to make a game, it's because ninety nine percent of everything is shit and that includes shit-headed game devs who cannot conceive of what a game is outside of the ridiculous retarded walls they set in their fucking little heads. (That, and technical limitations.) But see, the thing is, pretty much anything can tell a story. I can tell a story using toilet paper and my own shit if I want to (I don't). But games can allow the player to create their on story, and thus create something unique for them. If you can't see how a story a player creates is better than one he just looks at, even if he's experiencing it vividly as a character, then I'm really sorry for your parents. You probably remember the TV shows you watched better than the toys you played with, like your little sibling.

The reason games tell stories is because people are used to that and see no other use to them. But their potential is much greater, and even if they're fumbling in the dark people like... um... Passage guy who has the hard to spell last name are trying to make it happen. It's a technical hurdle as well as a mental one.

Is a game that just tells a story worse than a game that actually lets the player create one? That depends. Is a funny comedy with no cinematic aspirations a worse film than a deep cinematic thriller? The comedy will not win any Oscars, but I might want to watch it instead on a Thursday night. Each has its place, but the latter is more realized as its media - a well-edited, well shot film is more of a film, and a game that uses more of the properties unique to games is more of a game.

In the future, all great games will let players create their stories, or it will have failed.

 

[Feylynn]

Spoilers are not that simple.
There exists times when they compel me to watch or play something with increased interest but those are a rarity and somewhat misleading. After I have attained the moment which should have shocked, more critically this often exists at the all important ending, the moment I'll take with me long after the journey is over... I feel a disappointment.
"What if I had seen this properly? It would have been better."

In another veins. I am the one in my circle of friends that reads, watches, or plays something provoking and wonderful, then jumps around the room shouting across Ventrillo at how everyone MUST read/watch/play this.

These moments of awe for me, or more then a few seconds, they are a puzzle, a challenge that persists as long as it takes to share the shock of that moment several more times. Appreciating others appreciating that moment.
I need to be delicate, impress them enough with the premise of this vehicle to make them want the ride without knowing about the bomb that I have left with them.

This is a practice that can make this same shock surprising 5 or 6 times later and allow me to then search the story for that structure and appreciation you mention in your experience with BioShock.

These moments have significantly more weight for me. =)

 

[Ytmh]

Man I can smell the pretentiousness from page one. Sadly I kept reading, but it didn't get any better.

So, now that some guys who are trying to gain attention by "reinventing games" say that games can't tell stories (or shouldn't.) Well, sorry guys but you saying this doesn't take away the fact I actually LIKED Mirror's edge's story and I actually LOVED the ending because of the story. I felt the game was much better because of it!

I also like my stories in Deus Ex, in Vagrant Story, in all the hundreds of games I enjoyed BECAUSE of the story (nevermind great gameplay.) Even DOOM has a story I think makes the game all the better even if it's a paragraph long. If I want to write a story myself, I'll go and actually do that with words, you know, how you actually write a story?

As for the "manifesto" there, well sorry. It's just nonsense. Games have no end? Then they're not very much games, right? They're, hey, toys! How about that, isn't this the EXACT SAME THING that Will Wright was talking about, say, more than a decade ago? How is this "challenging" anything? Goddamn that manifesto seems just like the guy took Sim City and summed it up. That's pretty pathetic if it's meant to challenge the way we "think about games," as hey it's been done before. Tons.

A bunch of pretentious trash honestly, is all this article is and the mentions it makes. Honestly the sooner people realize that there's no need to "reinvent" or define what a game can and cannot be, the better. There are games that tell great stories, so what? You'll just say they're not good enough? Compared to what?

So what if some people don't want to play with others? I for one don't care much for multiplayer of any kind, why should I be forced to play along just because some guy on the internet now says that's what games "are better off doing."

And some view games as sports, not as some kind of mysterious untapped "art form." Are they wrong in doing this? Are those games "bad?" No, and of course not.

Why is it that all these people fail to just accept the vast amount of diverse opinions and games out there? If someone loves playing the old Konami arcade TMNT game over the latest COD, or braid, or whatever is popular ATM, what's it to you?

Geez, seriously.

 

[FollowUp]

This is the first escapist article I've read I've completely and totally disagreed with. Revelations are parts of games that add a great palpable sense of awe, like the end of Red Dead, NOT SPOILING. Where you fail here is in taking the word spoiling too literally. No one said knowing a game's ending ruined it utterly, but those moments of surprise make the game that much better. Oh, thanks by the way, you ruined Bioshock and Shadow of the Colossus for me, both STORY DRIVEN games that I intended to play.

 

[SaintWaldo]

That's wild that spoilers are traced to STII:WoK.

That's the first and ONLY movie I spoiled for anyone, and the look on my best friend's face when I dumped the secret that Mark IV torpedo contained is what I see every time I even THINK of spoiling any other big plot reveal.

I. Just. Can't. Do. It. Ever. Again.

 

[Straz]

Okay, next time WARN US OF THE FREAKIN SPOILERS.
I understand that it is an ARTICLE about them, but why do you feel you have to ruin every fucking game with them.
Maybe I could appreciate your view if I could read the article, but I'm not going to for fear of all your damn spoilers.

If a game has a story, THE STORY CAN BE SPOILED.
Duh.

Just saying, I disagree with this article.
Gameplay and story are two devices which are somewhat separate of each other, and telling us what to expect of a story takes away from that facet of the narrative/game.
The fun in a book is reading about the book's events and discovering new things contained within it, not just marveling at how well written each paragraph is.

 

[AWDMANOUT]

Spoiler tags please, now I know how Shadow of the Colossus ends.

T_T

Yeah, maybe there should just be a big *SPOILER ALERT* sign at the top of this article lol.

I don't really agree. I like suprises. =/

 

[Rhino of Steel]

I think your last analogy pretty much refutes your point. Sure, everyone wants to actually enjoy those presents under the tree but the anticipation and unwrapping are part of the experience and add to it.

Knowing for sure what you will get for Christmas (or your birthday or any other holiday) takes away some of the enjoyment as far as I'm concerned.

Also, the jabs at actual storytelling in games throughout the article was quite odd. Not a terribly enjoyable article even ignoring the plethora of spoilers (which I suppose I should have seen coming).

 

[lanoger]

Some people might enjoy spoilers - case by case or as a general rule - but taking the decision away from the person is a really asshat thing to do.

The perpetually wrapped gift analogy is false. It would be more true to say on christmas morning, after days of anticipation, the child's sibling sneaks in and unwraps the present instead. The gift itself isn't lessened, as the toy is the toy all the same, but the real pleasure of the reveal is gone.

You enjoy games how you want to, but don't you dare undermine how I enjoy my own.

 

[RowdyRodimus]

There has to be a statute of limitations on spoilers though. "Oh no, you gave the ending away to a 5-20 year old game! How am I ever going to enjoy it now?" If it is a new release or hell, anything less than a year old I can understand, but to whine about someone posting something about the ending to Shadow of the COlossus or Final Fantasy VII is stupid. That's like complaining that you heard the twist to Psycho or the first Friday the 13th in 2010.

 

[Dhatz]

There was a game, Gungirl 2 that introduced a nonlinear gameplay in genre that is usually strictly linear, a 2D duke nukem style platformer. you have so much freedon you can get extra weapons independently on story and I didn't feel any negative effect of being spoiled when I was seeing video walkthrough just to find out where to get the weapons. That's the way to do the equip, let layer decide(and try his luck) instead of some spawning points and prescribed enemy weapons. PS: MUST CHECK OUT THE CUBED MOD FOR MAX PAYNE 2!

 

[Rack]

Statute of limitations yes, but Shadow of the Colossus is hardly King Kong, it's a few years old, underprinted and is getting a reissue soon. Fortunately I was aware of this and skipped over much of the introduction and gladly remain spoiler free.

 

[jaeger138]

I feel that 'spoilers' are OK in certain games, stories, movies etc. But it really depends. I hadn't heard the twist in BioShock when I played it, and so can't speak about how I would have felt if I had known all along, as this article does. But what I do know is that I, like many others, love a twist and hate knowing what it is in advance. The reason? Restrospect.I love being able to look back on all I've done, consider it from a new perspective, even replay a title connecting the dots that I hadn't before. For me it makes me feel like I get more out of a game this way. I've experienced it one way, seen the twist and known the ending and then had to replay it in my mind, or even physically replay it again to get a whole new take on it.

I think that it's fair to say most games these days, especially those AAA titles that we all know and love are fairly linear in their narrative. There are a few exceptions and some that play with this linearity in interesting ways, even some games that try to get you, the player, to make your own choice and play the game you want to play but this often involves a karma system of sorts, one where you are told 'There's a good way, a bad way and a neutral way to end this conflict. Which you gonna pick?' Now this is fundamentally flawed in that there's more to real life than 2 or 3 options, and it essentially is just a mask for linearity. It disguises linearity under options and possibly the tease of a slightly different ending but in essence, the game you play is the same and the things you do to reach that end are essentially the same as other players with some minor variations.

While this is the case I think spoilers are always going to be a concern as you're always going to look back on your experience and think about the story that's unfolded and how this new development has driven the story without your knowledge. If you had that information prior to the experience you're whole game is going to be one of someone who is 'in-the-know', and for me that's just no fun. Sure, you have a little more perspective on the events but you prevent yourself from really experiencing two completely different stories.

Admittedly, games like Mirror's Edge don't necessarily get ruined by prior knowledge but it's not a story driven game. If I knew how Die Hard was going to end I don't think I'd mind because I'm not watching that for the story, it's the action I want to see. But if someone had told me that Vader is Luke's father, Luke and Leia are siblings and Vader used to be an annoying little kid who made C3PO ity would have bugged me because whilst the Star Wars films are epic for their action sequences, dazzling effects and intriguing setting, it's the story that drives these movies and many modern games.

I think in the end, it's an individual preference. Until we see a game that truly diverges from linear narrative, that really creates a dynamic story and actually lets the player's choices have dynamic ramifications on the game world and the story there'll be people who hate spoilers and people who don't mind at all.

 

[omegawyrm]

I actually agree with an Escapist article for once this time, my friends constantly whine about spoilers and I have no idea what the hell they're talking about.

I knew the endings of pretty much all of my favorite game, books, and movies before I ever saw them, which leads me to believe that probably part of the reason I enjoyed them so much lies in that knowledge itself. I knew how Dune, Cat's Cradle, and Good Omens were going to end before I read them and loved them. I knew that you ended up fighting Jecht and the Curse of Yevon at the end of FFX and that's my favorite game in the series (yes, I've played all of them before you ask). I knew Archer was Shirou before I read F/SN and that's probably my favorite novel ever. If you know anything about Ripper lore, you know how Alan Moore's From Hell is going to end, and that was my favorite of his books. I knew the whole story was going to be undone at the end of PoP: Sands of Time and still enjoyed that game a lot. I knew Batman wasn't going to die at the end of R.I.P. before I read it and that story still managed to win me over to Grant Morrison as a writer.

And those are just the ones I'm thinking of that were spoiled BEFORE I experienced them. I can think of many more that were relatively unsatisfying the first time through, but once I knew the ending became far more interesting experiences. Evangelion and Big O spring to mind as being far more enjoyable after the first watching, Evangelion because you pretty much have to know what's going to happen to make any sense of the earlier parts and to appreciate what's happening, Big O because you actually get to participate in the mystery only if you know how it ends. Metal Gear Solid 2 throws so much crazy crap at you during it's final phase that it can get kind of overwhelming the first time through, but all of that information is easily parseable and understandable once you know what's going on and the subsequent playthrough experiences made it my favorite game in the series. I liked Watchmen a lot better the second time through, appreciating the subtle character developments and elaborate metaphors that are constructed throughout the book is harder when you have to focus on what's going to happen next.

I could probably list examples of this sort of things for days, but it seems I'm in the clear minority here. I guess you can't experience a story both ways, once having been spoiled and once not having been, but my experiences with a lot of my favorite stories has convinced me that if a story is truly good in a worthwhile way, the experience of it can not be detracted from by spoilers but only be enhanced by them.

 

[The Last Nomad]

Its true that knowing the surprise alreay gives you a different understanding of a game/film/text, but not knowing allows you to have a different experience the first time and then the educated experience the second time.
I prefer not to be told about some things, because, sometimes it is so sudden, unexpected and even heartwrenching that the only effect it has is if it is a surprise.
While on the other hand, being told a spoiler may reveal a small amount of information that doesnt quite ruin anything, but it still ruins the joy of discovering this for yourself. There is a great sense of acomplishment at discovering previously unknown things all on your own, even if it isn't story related. Its like exploring unknown areas of an open-world game only instead of visual areas to discover, its information, story or even new abilities.

 

[boholikeu]

If a work is completely ruined by a spoiler, it really wasn't that great to begin with. Movies, games, and books that still reveal something new the umpteenth time you've watched/played/read it are basically spoiler-proof.

Having said that, I still mark spoilers because I understand that other people get irked about it.

There is certainly something to be gained by playing a game, watching a film or reading a book when you know the twist but there is also something to be gained by experiencing it NOT knowing. To say that spoliers ruin the experience might not be completely true but they only allow you to experience it one way. For those of us who enjoy the surprise I think that spoliers are just that, if the game/film/book was worth the effort then it is a joy both the first time and then again with a new, more informed, outlook. To know the twist without having played the game I think that you're missing out on half the fun.

Actually, I agree with this, but I don't know if I'd call it "half" the fun unless the game is only worth two play-throughs.

Back when Roger Ebert said games weren't art, there was a lot of argument about what, exactly, constituted art, with a strong faction saying art evoked emotion. In my mind, spoilers ruin the emotional experience. In my mind, spoilers are the equivalent of painting a mustache on the actual Mona Lisa, taking a sledgehammer to the Taj Mahal, or burning 80 frames, at random, out of the last copy of A New Hope. In my mind, spoilers destroy art.

This is an interesting idea, but honestly, if a plot twist or ending was the biggest thing that elicited emotion from you, that artwork is pretty shallow. Elements like characterization and tone are much more important, and they are virtually immune to spoilers.

If you still aren't convinced, consider this: most people know the endings to the classic works of literature and film, yet modern audiences still feel their emotional impact. This is because the art in Romeo and Juliet isn't in the fact that (spoiler!) they both die at the end; it's in the way that Shakespeare presents those events. By your logic, nearly every work of art would have already been "destroyed" years ago when the spoilers of their plot became common knowledge.