Poll: Games and Narrative

[Asti]

I'm currently writing my bachelor's thesis about narratives and games and I wondered what you think about this topic:

Do you appreciate a good story in a game? (That's kind of a duh-question, but anyway...)
Do you think a game needs a story?
Should narratives in games be more ambitious to bring the medium forward?
Do you consider the story as separate from the gameplay itself?
What's your favourite way games combine story with gameplay?

I'd very much appreciate any opinions.


Edit: Aaah, sorry about the vagueness, old habits die hard.

As there are obviously differences in genre (like tetris not needing any story to be great), I refer to any games that present themselves as "having a story". If you still want to differentiate, please do so in the comments. Basically, add these questions:

Which types or genres of games benefit the most of stories? Which ones can do without?

 

[jacobythehedgehog]

Narritive in the game combine with good asethetics and ofcourse good gameplay can make or break a game. Narritve is more then just the story. It is the feeling you get when your playing in the game. Good narritive could be the same as good asethetics. Narritive does not just have to be the story the game developers are trying to tell, it would be the story behind the enviroment as your trying to explore it. Shadow of the Colosuss and the idea of one man "alone" fighting his biggest fears to find love. Alone is the key word in this and that part of the game's story is told completly with the enviroment. Hunted: The Demon's Forge and the story of two companions travalling not for the sake of being heroes but the feeling of finding more out of life, until realising that the whole time, no matter how dark, friends are always there who care.

I personally thing narritive can make or break a game. Look at Duke Nukem Forever or Two World II. Thebad narritive in the game destroyed them

 

[ChupathingyX]

Personally I find narrative, story and characters to be really important. It gives you a reason to advance the plot, interact with characters, read all those diaries laying around and generally get lost in the game world and it's lore. The characters of a game should be varied and interesting, they should be done in a way that you want to know about their history, their motives, their personality and their beliefs. When it comes to stories I love choices that ake you think, think about what the consequences will be and make you really want to know what will happen in the end. These can be presented in various different ways whether it be by characters, the environment or a nice, simple narration.

That's what I love most about Fallout: New Vegas.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

I'm currently writing my bachelor's thesis about narratives and games and I wondered what you think about this topic:

Do you appreciate a good story in a game? (That's kind of a duh-question, but anyway...)
Do you think a game needs a story?
Should narratives in games be more ambitious to bring the medium forward?
Do you consider the story as separate from the gameplay itself?
What's your favourite way games combine story with gameplay?

I'd very much appreciate any opinions.

First define 'game'. Using a blanket statement that all games do or don't need a story is a misconception right there at the start. For some game genres such as RPGs, storyline is essential (see Baldur's Gate, Fallout, etc), for some genres like FPS games storyline is optional (see the original Doom for why it isn't needed, see CoD4 for how it can enhance the experience), and for other genres like Driving/Sport (Gran Turismo, FIFA/Madden) it is entirely unnecessary.

 

[neoptolemus]

1. Yes. Duh.

2. No. Tetris, Mario, chess, all great games with no story at all. A lot of my favourite games have terrible stories.

3. Certainly. There's a huge amount of uncovered ground in terms of game narratives. Story subjects for a start. There's massive holes in the market for games with truly intellectual stories with deep and relatable characters, particularly stories that don't involve war and fighting.

4. Yes and no. It all depends on how the story is presented. If the question is "Should the story be considered seperate from the gameplay?" the answer would definitely be no, however it often is. There are all too many games where the mechanics of the gameplay contradict the story (e.g. a cutscene at the end of a fight where you lose the fight, yet if you lose before triggering the cutscene you have to start over). Valve are excellent at presenting their stories and blurring the line between gameplay and cutscene, however the line is definitely still there. The best narrative games are games that tell their story through the mechanics of the game itself. I suggest you check out Solace [http://solacegame.com/], which does exactly that.

5. Although Braid's long blocks of text were a bit inelegant I did love how each one contained a reference to the mechanic of that stage (like the text for the stage with the time-slowing ring spoke about a ring). And although it's so simple it can barely be called a story the narrative in Super Metroid is beautifully presented by your environment.

 

[Asti]

First define 'game'. Using a blanket statement that all games do or don't need a story is a misconception right there at the start. For some game genres such as RPGs, storyline is essential (see Baldur's Gate, Fallout, etc), for some genres like FPS games storyline is optional (see the original Doom for why it isn't needed, see CoD4 for how it can enhance the experience), and for other genres like Driving/Sport (Gran Turismo, FIFA/Madden) it is entirely unnecessary.

Sorry, edited the initial post. Thanks for the heads-up.

 

[genericusername64]

For me it can make or break a game. I love crpg's, but when I played icewind dale something was missing, it had the same, gameplay as any other, but it had barely any story. There was almost no context for what you are doing. That really took me out of the game. Writing should be strong and prevalent. I can forgive a lot if writing is really good.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

Thanks for the heads-up.

No probs, always happy to nit-pick!

Whilst I've already mentioned that some genres do/don't/sometimes benefit from a storyline, I think that if a game claims (at least in part) to be story-driven then the overall gaming experience can be negatively affected by a poor story. At that point it becomes about expectation, as a player will always respond negatively to unfulfilled hype.

But, ok, to answer you questions directly:

1: Yeah, but the story has to make sense. Not be realistic, but at least make sense.

2: We've covered this one. Depends on the game.

3: Usually. In slower paced games I will always wallow in a good story, but in faster paced games (Gears and Halo, for example) overlong cutscenes can dampen the adrenaline buzz of the last level, leading to a "what the hell is all this pointless crap? C'mon c'mon c'mon!" kinda response. Slow paced games can afford the luxury of deep, though provoking cutscenes and story elements, but fast paced and ultimately uncomplicated games need fast paced and uncomplicated plots. But the film industry has known this for years.

4: Ideally the two should be interlinked. A common complaint of gamers is seeing their character performing unbelievable feats in cutscenes and the game then not allowing the player to be anywhere near as awesome (Devil May Cry was bad for that, from what I remember).

5: In my view the best way story can be implemented with gameplay is to create a steady and seamless tutorial over the first 10% (say) of the game, as opposed to having the oh-so-unsubtle tutorial level. But hey, that's me.

6: See 2! RPGs and JRPGs need story, they are by their very nature plot driven. FPS and Platformers, a story is nice but not essential. Driving and Sport games, I'm sorry but that story-line can get the hell off my lawn.

Blimey, that ended up being longer than I'd intended. If you'll excuse me I'll get down from my soapbox now...

 

[Asti]

Personally I find narrative, story and characters to be really important. It gives you a reason to advance the plot, interact with characters, read all those diaries laying around and generally get lost in the game world and it's lore. The characters of a game should be varied and interesting, they should be done in a way that you want to know about their history, their motives, their personality and their beliefs. When it comes to stories I love choices that ake you think, think about what the consequences will be and make you really want to know what will happen in the end. These can be presented in various different ways whether it be by characters, the environment or a nice, simple narration.

That's an interesting point: Do you think the plot is what should trigger the exploration, that being a gameplay element? Do you consider sidequests part of the plot or is the main quest the only thing that sticks with you as "the story of the game"?

3: Usually. In slower paced games I will always wallow in a good story, but in faster paced games (Gears and Halo, for example) overlong cutscenes can dampen the adrenaline buzz of the last level, leading to a "what the hell is all this pointless crap? C'mon c'mon c'mon!" kinda response. Slow paced games can afford the luxury of deep, though provoking cutscenes and story elements, but fast paced and ultimately uncomplicated games need fast paced and uncomplicated plots. But the film industry has known this for years.

6: See 2! RPGs and JRPGs need story, they are by their very nature plot driven. FPS and Platformers, a story is nice but not essential. Driving and Sport games, I'm sorry but that story-line can get the hell off my lawn.

Blimey, that ended up being longer than I'd intended. If you'll excuse me I'll get down from my soapbox now...

And I'll nit-pick right back at you.

Would you play a game whose genre seemingly contradicts its promised story? I don't know, like a FPS with an epic story about personal doubts, grief and parenthood. Does the genre (of game types that can deliver narration in a sensible way) affect your tolerance for different story types?

I mean: Can story-based games like RPGs adapt virtually any story and shooters are more limited because of their gameplay? Or are even those story-based games bound within the boundaries of genre typical storylines?

Sorry, I just can't seem to put my thoughts into words any better right now. -_-

 

[HassEsser]

It depends on how the dev approached the story in the first place. Take a look at the Rainbow Six Vegas games: they obviously knew no one gave a fuck about story and no one paid any attention, so they kinda spread a super thin one over the game just for the sake of having a story. I thought this was just alright.

Then there's game like Modern Warfare 2, where the dev clearly tried to make a solid story, and failed miserably. Kind of like Transformers 2 and 3. This type of story approach is awful, and unforgivable.

And finally, game likes Half-Life, Beyond Good and Evil, Metal Gear Solid, Psychonauts, ICO, Oddworld and Mass Effect, where the devs took very good care with the story, and crafted the gameplay around it perfectly. This is obviously the best route a dev can take, and is the most appreciated.

 

[ChupathingyX]

That's an interesting point: Do you think the plot is what should trigger the exploration, that being a gameplay element? Do you consider sidequests part of the plot or is the main quest the only thing that sticks with you as "the story of the game"?

Not at all, side quests can be just as important and interesting as the main quest. Most notably would be some of the companion quests in New Vegas. Some of them are activated by acquiring hidden "trust points" with the companion by visiting certain places or talking to certain people. If the companion is in your party at the time they may comment on the person or place and eventually once a certain number of these have been met the companion's quest will activate. These are good examples of character development and exploration, you need to become better aquainted with your companion and once you do they usually tell you their inner deepest secrets, Boone being a great example. Raul is also a good example as he opens up about his long history that spans before the bombs dropped, he offers some insight to what it was like to live before, during and after the Great War and how just because someone is old doesn't mean they are useless.

 

[Mr Thin]

I'm gonna treat that as a list of questions.

Do you appreciate a good story in a game?
Yes.

Do you think a game needs a story?
No.

Should narratives in games be more ambitious to bring the medium forward?
Yes.

Do you consider the story as separate from the gameplay itself?
Yes.

What's your favourite way games combine story with gameplay?
I'm not really sure what this is asking.

Spoiler: I think this is a good example...

I'm currently playing X-com: UFO Defense, where you are defending earth from an alien attack, and the only kind of plot the game has is revealed by capturing aliens (dead or alive), bringing them back to the base, and studying them in laboratories. This reveals their biology, technology, function, and general purpose. Through this studying, I'm learning more and more about why the aliens are here, and what they want.

It's a really awesome function, and if you consider that to be 'combining story with game-play', then that's the best way I've seen it done.

Apart from that, I'm having trouble coming up with any games that combine story with gameplay.

Which types or genres of games benefit the most of stories?
Definitely RPGs, probably due to the whole 'role-playing' thing they have going on. It's nicer to role-play when you have a story to do it in.

Which ones can do without?
All of them. A plot will almost always improve them though. At least, a good plot will.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

And I'll nit-pick right back at you.

Would you play a game whose genre seemingly contradicts its promised story? I don't know, like a FPS with an epic story about personal doubts, grief and parenthood. Does the genre (of game types that can deliver narration in a sensible way) affect your tolerance for different story types?

I mean: Can story-based games like RPGs adapt virtually any story and shooters are more limited because of their gameplay? Or are even those story-based games bound within the boundaries of genre typical storylines?

Sorry, I just can't seem to put my thoughts into words any better right now. -_-

See the FPS with the story about family and grief? That happened in Gears, and I don't know anyone who didn't want Dom to shut the hell up about his goddamned missus so that they could get back to chainsawing Locust (and no, that isn't an exaggeration for comic effect - none of my friends could be arsed with that bloody storyline).

I think for everything to tie in together the mood of the game must match the mood of the story and vice versa. Frantic games with ponderous plot just don't work, just as careful, considered games don't work with 'wham-bang-thank-you-ma'am' stories. Dark Corners of the Earth, for example, is technically and FPS but it focuses on suspense and detective work so it can get away with it's storyline being slower and deeper than most.

 

[BoredDragon]

Bioshock is my favorite game of all time and the story was a major part of it. Despite that fact, I still can forgive a game more for having a bad story than I can bad/boring gameplay. A story is nice, but the aspect in which you will interacting with the most in a game that lasts 10+ hours is going to be the gameplay.

That isn't to say that a bad story will not have an effect on a game. If the story is too lackluster then I won't have any motivation for my actions, thus the gameplay will start to bore me much quicker and my enjoyment from the game will plummet. On the opposite end of the spectrum, a well-written story can turn an ok or good game into a great game. That's is what aforementioned Bioshock was for me. The gameplay was pretty fun, but the narrative along with the shocking twist escalated it above everything I've played so far.

 

[Asti]

So what I've gathered until now is:

The story can make or break a game and the gameplay can make or break a story.
Would you agree?

What about a game like The Witcher 2? Can you forgive the flawed gameplay because of the elaborated storytelling?

 

[Kahunaburger]

What about a game like The Witcher 2? Can you forgive the flawed gameplay because of the elaborated storytelling?

Absolutely. That's A) partially because the flaws aren't nearly as bad as some people think they are, and B) because the gameplay is actually some of the best out there in terms of drawing you into the narrative. In the game, you feel like a monster hunter who has to use his wits as much as his sword to win, which is exactly how you should feel. This is because the game's massively flexible toolkit (potions, traps, lures, spells, swords, bombs, etc.) rewards planning and strategy to defeat opponents that would more often than not destroy you in a fair fight. It works a lot better at conveying the world than it would if the game played like God of War or something like that.

And yeah, the issues that actually are there (the flawed UI, some glitches associated with moving from one animation to another, inconsistent alchemy mechanics, and so on) are far overshadowed by the storytelling. Basically, think Prince of Persia: Sands of Time or Psychonauts - a game with occasional gameplay issues but whose gameplay ultimately supports the narrative and whose narrative is head and shoulders above the rest of the pack.

 

[veloper]

Nope. The plots are always mediocre or worse, but I'm still playing the actual game.
A basic premise and some way to tell what things the game elements are supposed represent, is enough fluff for me.

 

[SoranMBane]

I wouldn't say that games always need a story, but what they should have is an underlying theme of some sort. Having a story is just one of the easiest and most common ways to incorporate a theme, but it can be done purely with game mechanics as well (Extra Credits already did an episode on this topic, so I don't feel I need to elaborate much on that point). But even when the game isn't presenting its theme purely through gameplay and opts to use the typical story structure we see in most games, gameplay should still be a part of it. There are plenty of ways to do this, like tailoring the way the protagonist plays and feels to clue us in on their history and personality, or by telling parts of the story using environmental cues. The story should definitely not be relegated to just cutscenes and pickups. The player should be in the story at all times and not just playing a game until the game decides to stop and throw pieces of a story at them. In terms of specific genres, I wouldn't say that any one genre of game is more or less able to provide a deep narrative or theme, just that the techniques used to tell the story have to be properly tailored to that genre, and that different kinds of stories are often better told in different genres.

 

[Mr. Omega]

Here's my philosophy: Games don't NEED a story, but if they do have a story that is more than just an excuse to justify the game itself (as in, more complex than "Save the Princess" or "Defeat the Enemy"), it better be a good story. I can tolerate little to no story, like most Nintendo games. What I can't tolerate is a bad story. However, I can kinda tolerate a bad story if the gameplay is really good. If the gameplay is bad, I don't care how good the story is, I'm not putting up with it. Keep in mind that I mean BAD gameplay, not mediocre or dull gameplay. I can at least somewhat justify dull, repetitive gameplay if I have an incentive. This is why, while I do enjoy their games, I find Bioware to be highly overrated. But BAD gameplay is almost never worth the story.

Mario doesn't have a good story. Those games don't really even HAVE a story. And Mario doesn't NEED a story. It's not about story. The whole "Peach gets kidnapped" is always just an excuse for you to go to various exotic locations with great level design and catchy music to play a fun game. Yet a lot of people just tend to go "Hurrr, he's saving the princess again, Nintendo is so unoriginal and all the games suck!"

In RPGs, story is damn near essential. After all, it's a ROLE PLAYING GAME. You need to know the story to play the role. So if an RPG has a bad story, it's kinda hard to recover from that. Sure, there are exceptions, but most of the time it's because the story might be cliched or even mediocre, not bad. Gameplay also does need to be good, of course, it's one of the big reasons FFXIII got so much heat. But in RPGs, people are more than willing to let certain gameplay issues slide because of the story. So that story better be good.

Here's a fun little system I tend to use: If you can justify the main character's actions in 15 words or less, you probably don't need to think too much about the story. It doesn't work all the time, but it is very accurate.
Examples:
Mario: The princess has been kidnapped. Go save her.
Castlevania: You're from a family of vampire hunters. Go kill Dracula.
Bad Dudes: Ninjas have kidnapped the President. Are you a bad enough dude to save the President?
Left 4 Dead: Zombies are everywhere. You don't want to be zombie food. Work together and survive.
Punch-Out: You are a boxer. You want to be the champion.
Sonic: You run fast and save woodland critters from a fat scientist and his robots.

 

[Richardplex]

So what I've gathered until now is:

The story can make or break a game and the gameplay can make or break a story.
Would you agree?

What about a game like The Witcher 2? Can you forgive the flawed gameplay because of the elaborated storytelling?

It's not the witcher, but today I finished Mass Effect 1 (yeah I know I'm lagging behind, sue me) and It's already one of my favourite games. The gameplay is unoriginal really, though it's acceptable enough, the vehicle sections painful and the elevators agonisingly slow. But as someone who hasn't played a Bioware game before, yet is a fan of WRPGs, the narrative blew me away. The amount of story behind everything really added to my immersion, and the way characters adapted what they said from your actions and words, both previously to them and what you've said to other characters, and the backstory you've given to yourself, it made the world feel alive.

To answer your question, if the writing was of the level of, say, fallout 3, which was good but not amazing, I would of probably stopped half way through ME and not have spent 31 hours, and not have started my second playthrough. I hope my experience was of some use to you.