I'll admit that I'm one of the players (and amateur game designer) that doesn't care much for stories in video games since I feel like they serve more as exposition for a narrative I don't care about, or they distract from the main game that I find more enjoyable than the stupid character's drama with their parents. However this sentence does make some sense since I do believe that story should justify the reasoning why a player might do something in the core mechanics of the game. For example, "Prototype" gives a context reason why the avatar can eat people to unlock more information of the story or XP rewards; whereas "Fable II" gives no context reason why you could be a dick to a bunch of 1s and 0s.Yahtzee Croshaw said:As much as I keep hearing that game developers these days just don't care about story, one can't get away from the fact that story, setting and context all define the gameplay.
In most of my experience I tend to stick with the core mechanics first, and then build a story around that. However I think this is where some game designers might fail in justifying things in the context of the game. For example, I've been watching Graham and Paul (LRR crew) LP of "X-Men: Destiny." Supposedly the game starts with the destruction of the town from a mob of people that hate mutants--armed with electric batons and guns, but are capable of destroying a town so it looks like something from "Fallout 3." But if a game designer starts first with the story to justify the context of the core mechanics, could this limit options in the game-world to the player? How would this work with something like Skyrim or other sandbox games?