I agree, games just aren't really the best medium to tell stories in, they can tell stories, but if you're looking for story more than gameplay, you're doing it wrong. Watch a movie instead.veloper said:
Poll: Poll: gameplay or story
- Thread starter dcrane
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The whole point of games is gameplay. Some of my favorite games of all time, Saints Row 2 and Far Cry 2 used as examples here, spent vary little time on the story and just let you have fun. Not to say that a good story isn't welcome from time to time but if the story gets in the way of the gameplay (YES I AM looking at you final fantasy XIII) it becomes a detriment to the entire experience.
Both, ofcourse. That being said, if I have to choose one over the other, gameplay by a mile. I've put up with bad/terrible stories if I like the gameplay, but I really can't put up with bad/terrible gameplay just because I like the story. I can get good stories from every other medium out there, good gameplay is unique to this one.
I can handle a mediocre story, something like Hydrophobia: Prophecy or Borderlands. Bad gameplay and/or bad controls are a major turnoff for me.
It's a trickier question that it looks, and there's little doubt that in an ideal situation we'd have both. I'm more partial to a good story myself, but many of the best games make an attempt to involve the gameplay in said story. It's what separates the medium from the less interactive forms (film and books). For those who have been to live theater performances, you may have noticed that many of the best shows seek to involve the audience (usually by talking to them briefly, or occasionally having the actors being among the seats); gaming just takes this further by getting the player directly involved in the events. Films & books never change when watched/read again, but games & theater are very seldom the same thing twice.
Now then, bad gameplay will kill a game where a bad story may not; but while it's definitely more essential to game design, it doesn't necessarily have to be what the player prefers. Many games have gotten by with merely passable gameplay while a great storyline provides the motive needed to complete a game, an aspect which is very prevalent in the RPG genre (which is generally regarded as having the best storylines in gaming, collectively speaking). Back to games not being the same while replaying them, strong gameplay will likely play a bigger role here than a strong story. Bland & dull gameplay easily falls into repetitive routines (which can make a single playthrough too painful to complete, let alone multiple ones), while high-quality gameplay typically offers a lot of variety and you're able to approach things from different angles; it's that reason why at least passable gameplay is necessary for all games, even story-driven ones.
In the end, I think comes down to a matter of perspective.
Should the story complement the gameplay?
Or should the gameplay complement the story?
I definitely prefer the latter situation, because fun-factor alone doesn't keep me playing games. I'd very much prefer to have a great story for a game, and the experience is made better by the gameplay allowing me to be more directly involved in it. Fun gameplay is great, but it's just not something I can enjoy for it's own sake... though it doesn't take too much of a story to keep me interested enough to finish a game.
Now then, bad gameplay will kill a game where a bad story may not; but while it's definitely more essential to game design, it doesn't necessarily have to be what the player prefers. Many games have gotten by with merely passable gameplay while a great storyline provides the motive needed to complete a game, an aspect which is very prevalent in the RPG genre (which is generally regarded as having the best storylines in gaming, collectively speaking). Back to games not being the same while replaying them, strong gameplay will likely play a bigger role here than a strong story. Bland & dull gameplay easily falls into repetitive routines (which can make a single playthrough too painful to complete, let alone multiple ones), while high-quality gameplay typically offers a lot of variety and you're able to approach things from different angles; it's that reason why at least passable gameplay is necessary for all games, even story-driven ones.
In the end, I think comes down to a matter of perspective.
Should the story complement the gameplay?
Or should the gameplay complement the story?
I definitely prefer the latter situation, because fun-factor alone doesn't keep me playing games. I'd very much prefer to have a great story for a game, and the experience is made better by the gameplay allowing me to be more directly involved in it. Fun gameplay is great, but it's just not something I can enjoy for it's own sake... though it doesn't take too much of a story to keep me interested enough to finish a game.
Picking between the Story and Gameplay of a game is like deciding between the Ice and Cream of IceCream. You take just one and you're left with ether a cold lump of frozen water or a milky soup. You need both halves.
Now IceCream can be extra creamy and still be great, or maybe you're on a diet and want low fat IceCream and that's fine too, but completely dismissing one over the other in an IceCream scenario is a mistake because you're left with a product that is not IceCream.
It's a book[footnote]The actual story in games can actually be limited to just the visual aesthetics, something to which no game can do without.[/footnote], which is the purest form of story and thus the ice in this metaphor.
Now IceCream can be extra creamy and still be great, or maybe you're on a diet and want low fat IceCream and that's fine too, but completely dismissing one over the other in an IceCream scenario is a mistake because you're left with a product that is not IceCream.
It's a book[footnote]The actual story in games can actually be limited to just the visual aesthetics, something to which no game can do without.[/footnote], which is the purest form of story and thus the ice in this metaphor.
Has to be story, every time. If i'm playing through a game with great gameplay but a lame story i'll likely ditch it for something else.
I'm a sucker for a good story. Getting immersed in the game because I like the settings, characters, plot and denouement is one of the biggest reasons I game. Good gameplay is definitely a necessity otherwise, it feels like grinding when you're playing just to get to the next cinematic.
Nonetheless, I'd rather play through an awesome tale than not.
Nonetheless, I'd rather play through an awesome tale than not.
If you think about it though. You've got to have both gameplay and story.
If the gameplay sucks you won't be able to tolerate getting to the next story bit; if the story sucks I doubt the game play is genuinely that good to carry the whole thing like a wounded soldier up Everest. They're codependent. At least in my experience. There's obviously a give and take in most games, but one side or the other does not cut it.
If the gameplay sucks you won't be able to tolerate getting to the next story bit; if the story sucks I doubt the game play is genuinely that good to carry the whole thing like a wounded soldier up Everest. They're codependent. At least in my experience. There's obviously a give and take in most games, but one side or the other does not cut it.
If I had to choose between a game with mediocre gameplay but an amazing story or a game with fun gameplay and no story, I wouldn't hesitate to choose the former. But, ideally, gameplay should both be fun AND help to make the narrative deeper. Think about how awkward Wander from Shadow of the Colossus is with his sword for an example. It's because he stole that sword so he could use it to bring his girlfriend back to life, so he just doesn't know how to use it properly; a perfect example of gameplay helping to tell the story. Plus, sometimes good or unique gameplay just isn't enough to make a game interesting. After all, would Portal have been nearly as fun without GLaDOS? I think not. GLaDOS and the subtle narrative she helped provide accomplished something that no amount of clever puzzles would have been able to on their own; making one of the best games ever. Without a story, Portal would have been an interesting but otherwise kind of boring experience with hardly any replay value. So, story is king in my eyes.
I would like the story and gameplay to work together, but if I had to choose one it would have to be story.
I can forgive a game for having some crappy gameplay, but if they story is total shit then I won't bother to play more than I have to, or even finish the game.
I can forgive a game for having some crappy gameplay, but if they story is total shit then I won't bother to play more than I have to, or even finish the game.
This is a very hard choice for me. I believe that both gameplay and story are very important to any video game, actually the most important aspects, but if I have to choose between the two of them; I have to choose gameplay.
Gameplay is what the game is all about; it's what draws you to the game in the first place. When there's a game where you actually go looking for a fight in them, or can't wait to get to the next piece of action such as a boss fight; then you know that this game has amazing gameplay, and that can sometimes, but not always be good enough for some people.
Storyline is what catches you in a game. A good plotline can get you emotionally absorbed into the story and characters. For example, if you were to play Mass Effect 2, and a character who is always at your side dies; you would get upset about this; you actually felt attached to them. And it's not just about the characters; there could be a plot twist or a simple line someone says that just sends chills down your spine. As for the regard of "If I wanted story, I'd read a book or watch a movie"; storyline can actually work better for a videogame than it could for a book or movie. This is simply because, interacting with a story gets you more easily attached to it, so that little comment does not apply at all.
I don't believe that a truly great game could exist running on either gameplay or storyline, and that they both need to come together to make a game worthwhile, however there are some very rare cases when a game can have good gameplay and a crap story, but still be average and not totally awful, and in that sense; gameplay is just a tad more important than storyline.
Gameplay is what the game is all about; it's what draws you to the game in the first place. When there's a game where you actually go looking for a fight in them, or can't wait to get to the next piece of action such as a boss fight; then you know that this game has amazing gameplay, and that can sometimes, but not always be good enough for some people.
Storyline is what catches you in a game. A good plotline can get you emotionally absorbed into the story and characters. For example, if you were to play Mass Effect 2, and a character who is always at your side dies; you would get upset about this; you actually felt attached to them. And it's not just about the characters; there could be a plot twist or a simple line someone says that just sends chills down your spine. As for the regard of "If I wanted story, I'd read a book or watch a movie"; storyline can actually work better for a videogame than it could for a book or movie. This is simply because, interacting with a story gets you more easily attached to it, so that little comment does not apply at all.
I don't believe that a truly great game could exist running on either gameplay or storyline, and that they both need to come together to make a game worthwhile, however there are some very rare cases when a game can have good gameplay and a crap story, but still be average and not totally awful, and in that sense; gameplay is just a tad more important than storyline.
You know, I can't stop thinking about this. Yes, it's subjective, but I think Blizzard games give the most credibility to the "Story V. Gameplay" argument. When I think fantastic story I don't think Blizzard (I don't think fantastic gameplay either, but this is an example). In fact, if you had to ask me top ten best storytellers Blizzard ain't on my top five, I doubt it would make ten.
Yet somehow people managed to get sucked into a void of what is generally condoned to be "good gameplay". Over ten million fanatics can't be wrong. Right?
Yet somehow people managed to get sucked into a void of what is generally condoned to be "good gameplay". Over ten million fanatics can't be wrong. Right?