Silicon Knights President: "Gameplay Isn't Everything"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I think you don't understand the concept of a video game. You're thinking of a book or movie. If you don't care at all about the actual gameplay of a game, why aren't you watching a movie or reading a book?Fumbles said:
I don't see anything wrong with this. It would be equivalent to a film-maker saying "visuals aren't everything". Each art-form has its one, chief component...but it's not this component on its own that differentiates the form. The best music doesn't just sound the best: it engages on other levels, whether that be by narrative or atmosphere. The best movies don't just have the best visuals: they've got engaging stories, and good audio, and a proper presentation.
The best games are not, necessarily, (arguably) those that have the most engaging game-play: they are the games which manage to INCORPORATE gameplay into how they bring together all those other elements, in a way which is DIFFERENT than film or, say, comics.
The defining element of an artform isn't the top of the pyramid so much as the foundation of the house.
The best games are not, necessarily, (arguably) those that have the most engaging game-play: they are the games which manage to INCORPORATE gameplay into how they bring together all those other elements, in a way which is DIFFERENT than film or, say, comics.
The defining element of an artform isn't the top of the pyramid so much as the foundation of the house.
Precisely. And on an additional note who here liked Shadow of the Colossus? Let's face it. Portal? Wouldn't have nearly the lifespan it has were it not for the setting.Fuhjem said:
If this quote wasn't coming from Dennis Dyack then we'd all be going, "...Well, duh."
Games have to use gameplay as a foundation.
He's right, that successful games tend to have huge narratives and beautiful scenery, but all that will fail to move you if the game isn't fun to play. If a game is just painful to play, then noone will play it.
I mean, I'd love to say that Too Human had an awesome story and beautiful graphics, and only failed due to its gameplay.. but that's not the case. Too Human was an abject failure, in all areas that it could be measured. It looks shitty, ran shitty, sounded shitty, and most importantly, played shitty.
This Dyack guy really shouldn't be making games. He should be making shitty movies like Uwe Boll
And as for Portal, the setting gave the game staying power, but the actual execution of the games gameplay was what really amazed most people. Yes, GlaDoS was a breath of fresh air as far as villains go, but the Portal Gun, and using it, was very intuitive, and everything played just how you'd think it would, and the game wasn't painful in the slightest to play.
Those two games, I hadn't PLAYED anything quite like them, ever.
He's right, that successful games tend to have huge narratives and beautiful scenery, but all that will fail to move you if the game isn't fun to play. If a game is just painful to play, then noone will play it.
I mean, I'd love to say that Too Human had an awesome story and beautiful graphics, and only failed due to its gameplay.. but that's not the case. Too Human was an abject failure, in all areas that it could be measured. It looks shitty, ran shitty, sounded shitty, and most importantly, played shitty.
This Dyack guy really shouldn't be making games. He should be making shitty movies like Uwe Boll
both of those games had GAMEPLAY that enthralled me. The idea, and execution of climbing a monster to kill it may seem just like a "setting" vote, but it took the actual gameplay execution to make it a captivating game. If it was boring, or overly painful to climb the monsters, then it would have been a failure of a game.ButtonedDownParadox said:
And as for Portal, the setting gave the game staying power, but the actual execution of the games gameplay was what really amazed most people. Yes, GlaDoS was a breath of fresh air as far as villains go, but the Portal Gun, and using it, was very intuitive, and everything played just how you'd think it would, and the game wasn't painful in the slightest to play.
Those two games, I hadn't PLAYED anything quite like them, ever.
I wonder what his definition of "gameplay" is. The point I think he's trying to make is that developers should put more and more effort in the storyline, but this really doesn't diminish anything. There is no secret storyline/gameplay balance that needs to be kept in equilibrium.
You cannot have a good game without good gameplay. Period. You can't have a decent game without decent or better gameplay. Bad gameplay will ALWAYS make a game bad.
What he's saying is like saying "in a chicken sandwich, the chicken isn't everything". I don't care if the cheese, bread, and everything else is the best in the world, if the chicken is rotten and putrid and tastes like shit IT'S STILL A SHIT SANDWICH.
What he's saying is like saying "in a chicken sandwich, the chicken isn't everything". I don't care if the cheese, bread, and everything else is the best in the world, if the chicken is rotten and putrid and tastes like shit IT'S STILL A SHIT SANDWICH.
Huh. You know, even the engaging games that people play these days still have good gameplay. It's not an either/or situation. In fact, I'd go so far as to say most games which are now beloved are so because of the gameplay more than anything else. Very few games can be good without having good gameplay, Xenogears being about the only example I can think of. And that's only because the dialogue and story are SO amazing.
I always say that gameplay is king. After that it's the storyline, then controls, then music, then graphics.
I always say that gameplay is king. After that it's the storyline, then controls, then music, then graphics.
I agree with him. I had a great experience with Crysis Warhead because it was so incredibly cinematic. Sure, the plot was from a run-of-the-mill Hollywood action film, but the techniques that they used created this awesome feeling of immersion like I was really at the middle of it.
I'm pretty sure controls are part of the gameplay and far far more important than any storyline. Someone on this thread mention puzzle games and roguelikes as examples of games that were just that. And that's the point, really: you can make an awesome, engaging game and not concentrate on any of the other areas than gameplay. You can't really do it the other way around.
I see where he's going with that, how everyting needs to be balanced for everything to work together perfectly. However, gameplay should definitely be hand and foot over the other aspects. Sure, a great story is nice, but with bad gameplay, who gives a shit about the story? He should've wrote a book, or made a movie. Graphics are a smaller part of a game aswell. My favorite game of all time [Syphon Filter] had horrible graphics, they were okay back then, but still pretty bad. To make a good game you do need those elements, but not in equal portions. Gameplay comes first above all else, then a good, compelling story, then some fitting, and gripping music, then make it look nice.
Some game designers who I respect (Soren Johnson, Brenda Brathwaite, Harvey Smith) have responded to this on Twitter.
http://orbit.vect.org/misc/gamedesign.html
I hate saying this since I'm pretty bad myself, but Denis Dyack always seems to be a little out of his depth when talking about complex issues in public. Maybe that is the way he likes it.
http://orbit.vect.org/misc/gamedesign.html
I hate saying this since I'm pretty bad myself, but Denis Dyack always seems to be a little out of his depth when talking about complex issues in public. Maybe that is the way he likes it.
That's about what I was thinking. You're not going to get a whole lot out of that amazing story if you can't even get past the first level. Or you get a game that's so easy that while the story is interesting, there's no fun in playing it. In which case, all that's needed to save you $60 is to wait for some kind person on youtube to upload all the important story related content.murphy7801 said:
Of course, they could also just do what Alone in the Dark did and throw on a chapter skipping feature.
No I do, and I understand what you are saying. My problem is that most people ( Or rather the people in my area of the U.S) will say a game/movie is bad, because it tries to tell a story. So gameplay is not everything, it is important, but games should not just be about it.Mythos1092 said:
For all the retards saying a game is the sum of its parts and basically agreeing that gameplay isnt everything. I've played plenty of games that had *AWFUL* graphics that were shit hot games (off the top of my head - Dwarf Fortress, and the original geometry wars) Yet im yet to play a game that had amazing graphics and wank gameplay I feel the same about (again off the top of my head... Far cry? that game looked the dogs bits when it came out but as a game it was complete gash)
p.s games dont NEED story. TF2 doesnt have a story. Counterstrike doesnt have a story. Geometry wars doesnt have a story.
p.p.s I bet this silicon knights douchebag has a poster of Michael Bay on his wall
p.s games dont NEED story. TF2 doesnt have a story. Counterstrike doesnt have a story. Geometry wars doesnt have a story.
p.p.s I bet this silicon knights douchebag has a poster of Michael Bay on his wall
I agree with his sentiment. Games have evolved from merely "fun" to engrossing, enriching experiences, a la Bioshock and Metal Gear Solid.
Of course, Mr. Too Human, you should also know that without satisfying gameplay, a game will not be able to deliver its story in a memorable way at all. I know someone who played Too Human, and he totally forgot the story two months after playing it (literally, every single detail) because the gameplay just detracted from the experience so much.
Gameplay may not be everything, but it's certainly the most important factor. Excellent gameplay can elevate the storytelling capablities of a game to a level far beyond what movies and books can ever hope to achieve. Similarly, awful gameplay can completely invalidate a story.
Of course, Mr. Too Human, you should also know that without satisfying gameplay, a game will not be able to deliver its story in a memorable way at all. I know someone who played Too Human, and he totally forgot the story two months after playing it (literally, every single detail) because the gameplay just detracted from the experience so much.
Gameplay may not be everything, but it's certainly the most important factor. Excellent gameplay can elevate the storytelling capablities of a game to a level far beyond what movies and books can ever hope to achieve. Similarly, awful gameplay can completely invalidate a story.
