Vault101 said:
Im still not buying the "horrbile" storys thing..I mean OK I can get that its not quite on par with the best of what other mediums have to offer...but you still have your horrible books and crappy movies..games are somtimes better
if your talking about playing to the strengths of the medium..then yes I can get that, like (I hate to keep repeating myself) Portal or Bioshock or even somthing like Fallout 3/NV
it somtimes annoying me how games keep getting compared to other mediums (like movies) I dont think that comparison is fair, you try and aproach a game story like you would a movie (more or less) and it doesnt work
what Im saying is, if Im going to play a game I want "context" I want there to be a point to what Im doing and I like there to be some kind of payoff...basically I want story
I think a good game story is comparable to the story of an average action flick. Good enough that I can watch the explosions without cringing, but nothing special. I think it's important that I say that I don't have a problem with that at all, as long as the story is good enough it works for me.
Your point about context is one I agree with. I expect a story that is good enough to provide context, or context through other means. Because I believe context can be added in other ways than through a linear story.
The comparison to movies is natural, because so many games use movie mechanics to tell their story. I think that is limiting both the storytelling and the gameplay. Movies are linear and non-interactive, games are non-linear and interactive. There's a huge potential for incompatibility there.
Portal is a game where I can't decide if the storytelling is an act of genius, or a quick and dirty attempt to add context to a game that doesn't need one. On one hand the setting is so abstract that it seems beyond storytelling, like Tetris or Bejewelled. On the other hand it creates an almost surreal feeling that can best be compared to something Kafka could have written. The fact that I'm so indecisive about it is probably a mark of quality.
Bioshock on the other hand is a title I simply don't get. And I don't understand why people mention it as an example of great game storytelling. To me it feels like walking through a museum, with the occasional interruption of gameplay, or the occasional interruption of story. The two elements seems so far apart that they compete against each other instead of supporting each other. Maybe it would have helped if the game was less linear. I could imagine an RPG'ish investigation game could have worked well for the setting. Something like the gameplay of "Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines" perhaps.
totally heterosexual said:
Why does everyone ignore me ;~;
Maybe because a lot of people said something interesting so it's easy to get lost in the crowd. I think your first post sums up the issue quite nicely. Making better stories is not a hard thing to do, making stories that complement gameplay is the really tricky thing.
I also agree with Hyper-space's take on the current situation. Early movies were mostly adaptions of stageplays, because that was the type of expression movie makers were familiar with that were the closest to the movie medium. It makes sense that games are inspired by movies until they find their own expressions.