It seems like most of the discussion about problematic stories centers around immersion, which to me breaks down into two parts: pacing and emotion.Extra Consideration said:Extra Consideration: The Rest of the Story
Our contributors turn their gaze on Resident Evil to close out the discussion of story in games.
Read Full Article
First, pacing. The action stops, and you have story. It's like opera, in which recitative is where the story happens, but everyone's there to hear the arias. Or like slasher films or porn--in both cases, story is just stalling while you're waiting to see how the next person gets screwed. The action breaks down into abstract nuggets of fun... and the story has no momentum, because it keeps interrupting itself with "commercial breaks" called gameplay.
Next, emotion. Shamus made a remark about RE4: "...all of your worst setbacks take place in the cutscenes." It raises a good point. In addition to the "shit hits fan" moments, cutscenes are also where all of the cool shit happens. And shouldn't that be the stuff the player gets to do? It's hard to immerse yourself in a character when you spend his/her most brilliant moments just watching.
Really, the story works with the gameplay as long as both are following the same pacing (without interrupting each other), and working to convey the same emotional tone to both the character and the player. When the story is getting to the good parts, the player should be doing more, not less. And when the hero is feeling heroic, the player should feel heroic, too.