The Story

[RabbidKuriboh]

nothing that hasn't been said already

one thing i would like to point out, it shouldn't matter how a well written story is told, sure games have many unique ways of conveying a narative but always going off against non interactive methods can be annoying

sometimes dialogue and wise use of cutscenes can greatly improve a game's story

 

[bjj hero]

Disagree, we like getting locked out of and into choices, cuz we actually BUY the game, spend our money on ONE game, and want to be rewarded for multiple play thrus. Don't be so cocky and think that since u get to play lots of games that we all do. It would be dumb if your choices in dialogue had no effect. If that was the case, why even have them??? Gosh i dont like this guy.

Is "we" like the royal we? I buy my games and there are very few games I give multiple play throughs. I have a family, a career, other interests and a life away from my console and PC. I am not 16 with time to game 8 hours a day, gamers are individuals with different lifestyles.

If I get a satisfying play through where I feel like I have experienced all a game has to offer then do I need a second play through? Multiple play throughs via withholding content feels like a cheap way to extend the life of a title.

On a seperate note, you are posting on a forum, you have plenty of time to write your post. Were you really in such a hurry that you needed to use "u" and "cuz"?

 

[Ed.]

So apparently everyone but Yahtzee had their hands full but on week 2 they finally had to deliver *something* so the series doesn't get killed before it started?

Works for me!

Actually, a bit of rotation might be good. I initially was fascinated by Extra Consideration before even reading it, for the simple fact that three big influential characters were supposed to discuss something together, but it might be good to exchange parts of the cast every now and then if a special topic comes up where they might not have much to say about. For example, was a good idea to bring guys from Unskippable into this.

Keep it up, Extra Consideration is one of the most interesting things for me to read on The Escapist!

this also if it means we get more articles of it.

also I would be fine with it branching if that's how the convo rolls

 

[Taxman1]

The Dot Hack games and most jrpgs are a victim of this. I would be in a field slashing monsters up and then a cutscene appears. Most of them are completely irrelevant. Though I rather have it in the middle arc of a game rather than the beginning because it turns me off usually.

Off Topic: I think we are going to see a lot of members now that would say "Oh I didn't like PST, because the story and gameplay didn't mix well."

 

[dunnace]

For me some of the most compelling storytelling was No More Heroes, but probably because it was confusing as hell and required research on my part. Same goes for the MGS series. For some reason despite those games being utterly incomprehensible the first time you play them after I go and do the research it becomes suddenly very exciting and well written. Credit to NMH in particular, which has a much larger meta-storyline flowing through the whole thing.

As for storytelling games that were straightforward and good, Oddworld gets my vote with their twisted fable approach and Brutal Legend packed a hell of a punch with witty dialogue and a mix of conversations and action. It worked really well, and I keep having to give Schafer credit for his accomplishment with that.

And for unique storytelling, Heavy Rain was certainly interesting, but a real one off for me. If you were to try it again, unless the plot was really good, I'd probably hate it. That game was essentially a branching path collection of cutscenes, quite good cutscenes with some bad voice acting, but never the less the whole thing is a long film you have to constantly occasionally interactive with. I found it interesting as I played it with a friend and we um'd and ah'd over who we thought the killer was, but the actual game with only mildly interesting at best. After we finished heavy Rain we decided to get Fahrenheit to do the same all over again and MY GOD THAT THING HAS AGED. Do not get Fahrenheit if you played Heavy Rain first.

 

[Supp]

Best thing about this article?

Graham's picture. Made me chuckle for quite a while.

I'd like an NPC to start talking to me as soon as I come close to them

Final Fantasy XIII did this, and I have to say that I really didn't enjoy it. I'd much rather click a to talk to an NPC and get some interesting information, a la earlier Final Fantasies.

 

[mograf]

I enjoyed reading this piece a lot.
I think there's a lot to be said for the transition from PS1 to PS2 era of consoles. If we take final fantasy as an example: Final Fantasy VII told a story that so many gamers connected to on an emotive level. The story was told entirely through text, so players could connect to characters like they would reading a novel. With the power of the PS2 we had fully voiced cut scenes, however hammy voice acting in Final Fantasy X put me off the story, and I could not connect to any of the characters as they all felt like something out of a bad anime.
Now, since the games industry has swelled, we have bigger budgets, and Hollywood actors voice act in games. However so few developers seem to succeed in bringing depth to characters.

Interesting stuff said here as to weather or not games NEED a story. As the lines between Cinema and games blur, we should consider if this is always such a good thing?

 

[mjc0961]

I will certainly agree with what Yahtzee said about the game stopping play to show you something in the room. I hate that so much, especially when it's done constantly. The bottom line is that I want to PLAY this game, not watch it. When you take control away from me, it had better be for a good reason and it had better be worth it. I know this example doesn't really pertain to story, but take something like Burnout Paradise which constantly takes control away from you to show you a slow-mo of your crash and then a few more seconds of the enemy who just got you if you were rammed into the crash. And you crash a LOT in Burnout, so it's constantly going "HEEEEEY check out this crash you were in bro isn't it cooooooooooool in slooooooooow mooooooooootiooooooon?". It pisses me off to the point where I can't stand to play the game anymore.

To tie this back to the story theme, if you're going to stop me playing in the middle of something for some story bits, then it had better be some good and useful story bits, and there had better not be ages of loading in there too. The only thing worse than a constant stream of gameplay | cutscene | gameplay | cutscene | gameplay when the cutscenes aren't important is a constant stream of gameplay | loading | cutscene | loading | gameplay | loading | cutscene and so on. It's not as bad in a game with levels and you just get cutscene in between each level, because at least then you have a decent breaking point for saying "okay, I finished this bit, now I can relax for a bit and watch this." But I hate it in the middle of gameplay, you're trying to do something and then "LAWL CUTSCENE TO TELL YOU SOMETHING STUPID ENJOY HAHAHAHA!" I hate this so much about modern Command and Conquer games, C&C3 especially. You're trying to start playing and then all of a sudden it yanks the controls away again to show you what your objectives are, even though I already know what they are. Just bugger off and let me play! Or in Red Alert 3 Commander's Challenge where they are constantly taking away your radar-screen mid battle to have someone deliver one or two lines either taunting you or whining about losing. STFU and give me my radar back, it's important to gameplay you asshat!

*ahem* Anyway. I guess I ought to hurry up and start playing Half-Life, so I can finish playing it and then move on to Half-Life 2 to see what Yahtzee and Shamus were talking about.

Oh, and I loved that the icon of Graham has him holding a camera. Very nice.

OT: A game that had a great Story for me was Okami.

I personally couldn't stand it while I was still playing it. Basically I was just so annoyed with Isun constantly interrupting gameplay to talk for what felt like 10 minutes for about every 30 minutes or so of gameplay. Once he starts talking he just about never shuts up, and he never has anything terribly interesting to say.

Did this week's Extra Consideration seem a bit short to anyone else? I mean, I like the weekly discussion and all, but I needs me at least three pages of important people talking about stuff I find important to really get into it.

Yeah, very short. It seemed like it was just starting and then come back next week? Is this as far as the three of them got in their conversation so far? I hope it's not being held back just for the sake of having something next week, because that was a really odd place to end it.

 

[Yossarian1507]

1) Just about everyone who plays the game [HL2] agrees that this integration of gameplay and story is wonderfully done

No! Not everyone. I like the idea of the integration of gameplay and story (for example in Modern Warfare, where they did it right), but the way HL2 did it was horrible in my opinion, for two reasons:

1) I prefer no freedom (cutscene, scripted events in MW etc.) to the illusion of freedom that HL2 gives. Yes, you can run around, play with your gravity gun or whatever, but on a couple of occasions I was just screaming 'COME ON! LET ME AT IT! I could easily prevent the disaster, if you would just let me take the full control!' The ending of Ep 2 is a good example. I get it, you were hit by some sort of anti-gravity pulse or whatever, but so did Alyx and Eli, and somehow he could hit the advisor with a pipe. So I say - let me just blast it to hell with my weaponry. But no. It's a scripted event, and you can't do shit. God, that pissed me off so much. It's just annoying and extremely frustrating.

2) PACING! Oh my God, pacing! It's actually funny that Yahtzee writes about importance of it, while praising the storytelling of HL2. It's just way too slow. Too many monologues (because Gordon is a mute), while literally NOTHING happens. Say what you want, but if someone talks to you, and instead of listening, you're dicking around and throwing stuff against the wall because it's more interesting - that means someone screwed up. Big time.

Sorry for that outburst. I'm just so sick of people praising HL2 left and right. >.< It's not a bad game (though I didn't like it at all, and points above are about half of the reason why), but definitely not worth all the praise it gets.

 

[Ben Simon]

Actually, a bit of rotation might be good. I initially was fascinated by Extra Consideration before even reading it, for the simple fact that three big influential characters were supposed to discuss something together, but it might be good to exchange parts of the cast every now and then if a special topic comes up where they might not have much to say about. For example, was a good idea to bring guys from Unskippable into this.

Keep it up, Extra Consideration is one of the most interesting things for me to read on The Escapist!

I have nothing to add, but the more people support this, the more likely it will happen.

 

[Puzzlenaut]

This is where games like the new Fallouts (which I otherwise love) and Mass Effect take me out of the game because I'm always worried about what I might be unknowingly screwing up by selecting one dialogue choice over another. Like yourself, gaming is my job as well as my hobby, and I don't have time for unlimited playthroughs of a game, so I want the one play I DO get to be good. But I find myself afraid to pick dialogue options as I please, and instead scrutinize a walkthrough for fear that if I choose poorly then NPC 1 will die later, or Quest-Line X will lock down... all because I said "Yes" to someone who seemed nice at the time.

Disagree, we like getting locked out of and into choices, cuz we actually BUY the game, spend our money on ONE game, and want to be rewarded for multiple play thrus. Don't be so cocky and think that since u get to play lots of games that we all do. It would be dumb if your choices in dialogue had no effect. If that was the case, why even have them??? Gosh i dont like this guy.

You sound much more cocky than this guy, and he completely excuses himself earlier by admitting that most people get to play single games more than him as he is ferried onto the next one after a week.
I think you just don't like him because he's not Yahtzee or Moviebob, quite frankly.


In other news, these two guys are better than the other two -- the other two are great, but they are afraid to offer their opinions, seemingly.

 

[Resin213]

I'm kind of surprised they didn't mention Heavy Rain. Yahtzee seems to allude to their setup when he gets into the bit about timed responses, and the story is the gameplay. The dialogue tree is the gameplay for that matter.

 

[Valanthe]

Disagree, we like getting locked out of and into choices, cuz we actually BUY the game, spend our money on ONE game, and want to be rewarded for multiple play thrus. Don't be so cocky and think that since u get to play lots of games that we all do. It would be dumb if your choices in dialogue had no effect. If that was the case, why even have them??? Gosh i dont like this guy.

Is "we" like the royal we? I buy my games and there are very few games I give multiple play throughs. I have a family, a career, other interests and a life away from my console and PC. I am not 16 with time to game 8 hours a day, gamers are individuals with different lifestyles.

If I get a satisfying play through where I feel like I have experienced all a game has to offer then do I need a second play through? Multiple play throughs via withholding content feels like a cheap way to extend the life of a title.

On a seperate note, you are posting on a forum, you have plenty of time to write your post. Were you really in such a hurry that you needed to use "u" and "cuz"?

While I wouldn't be so pretentious as to assume my opinion stands for anyone but myself, I have to agree with Neogeta in that, even though I -rarely- give a game more than a single playthrough, I actually take a great amount of pleasure in the fact that the choices I make have consequences and that those consequences are helping to shape and form not only a story, but a world around me. Just as in real life, I make mistakes, sometimes big ones, these mistakes have consequences (Poor Thane, you will be missed) and those consequences are folded into the tapestry that becomes, in the case of my above example, my story of Commander Shepard.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

I kinda want to reference the way Enslaved did things. You interacted while other characters were doing their thing. It may not have been the best example, but it felt more natural to see them getting along and working together with all they went through than Dragon Age 2's radial menu of blank face for two minutes while I get up for a piss.

 

[Srdjan Tanaskovic]

Developers are obsessed with this "gameplay | cutscene | gamplay | cutscene | gameplay" approach to game design.

yeah maybe they do that because cutscence can be skipped. in Half-Life 2 you will have talks (some longer then other) and some people will not care about and there is no way to skip them

 

[Srdjan Tanaskovic]

Graham Stark: Yahtzee, it's funny you mention Alpha Protocol, because it did another thing I liked when dealing with conversation trees, which is making your choices largely unimportant to the story

ehm aren't you thinking of a Bioware game there?

 

[pezmanon]

Anyone else find "extra consideration" a bit boring? I only really read it because I like yahtzee's videos and articles. It's a nice idea, and if you're really into analysing video games, then it might be for you; but I just can't get much entertainment out of it. Yahtzee is only good when he's abusing people/games/objects. And I don't know who the rest of the people are, but they seem....meh.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

i was wondering why shamus, and indeed graham werent part of the first one, i think like someone else mentioned a rotation of everyone each week would be awesome, because everyone involved in extra consideration so far, is pretty much everyone who i visit the escapist for

 

[Dectilon]

It's not uncommon to hear people say stuff like 'stories were better ten years ago' or something similar, but they often can't put the finger on why they think that. The unreasonable will make up crazy reasons whereas the less crazy try to pick out details that appealed to them personally.

But, I think it goes deeper than that and if we focus on RPGs I have two things to suggest.

1: Voice acting sucks!

I'm not saying game voice acting is doomed to suck from now 'till eternity, but as a general rule it's just not that good for various reasons. Even if the actors are capable they're simply handed a heavy binder full of words to be read into a microphone. As long as that tasks is completely things like characterization, shifts in emotion depending on the situation and that unshakable feeling that they're not talking to you so much as reading a list to you aren't important enough to get right.

In games like Torment and the Baldur's Gates there was very little acting. Most characterization was done through text where shifts in mood and expression were described for you to imagine rather than implied and not really followed up on by the actor/character model. Basically, we remember the stories and characters as better because we were left to, for the most part, imagine them rather than have a bland performance forced upon us.

Still, I think the craziest part is the gamers of today who claim to love the acting in games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect, standards fallen so low that they would be blown away by some random soap opera on tv. The procedures for voice acting need to improve a lot before they can compete with our imaginations.

2: The main character could be smart.

In the more recent BioWare games I get the feeling the people who claimed Inception could never be successful because of its complexity have a hand in the game of modern video games. Most responses in BioWare's more recent titles results in the NPC calling you a moron and disproving sort of brushing the protagonist like a dumb child. And often that's what the dialog feels like. Even the 'power'-responses that you gain through influence or good/evil-levels seem flimsy and of no higher consideration than any other words one could've chosen. But the jesus-touch of the protagonist makes even the most ineffectual argument seems Ciceronian if backed up by enough paragon points. It heals the addicts, it stops the ruthless murderers hand, it scares the fearless warrior races.

Of course there are plenty of examples of this in earlier works from various companies, but there's one thing that's slightly different. As long as there were intelligence and/or wisdom stats there was room for longer, more convincing arguments, not seldom something that extended past one exchange. The extended conversation you have with Dak'kon in Planescape Torment is a pretty good example of this, were you actually start shattering a man's perception of reality. It's not quick, it's not badly underbuilt and it's not something that has immediate effect on the character.

All in all, I think it's time to do something with the 'intelligence'-tool again, because playing as a idiot space marine or medival moron isn't really that flattering since it suggests the player isn't smart enough to figure things out past what you can put into the character's mouth. If you're constantly several steps ahead so to speak it just feels frustrating, and you can't adapt by for instance maxing out the intelligence stat

edit: As for Alpha Protocol, your choices can change the story monumentally. What is this dude talking about?

 

[bjj hero]

Well first, you are right "we" isn't everyone; i was only speaking for most gamers, who have a limited amount of disposable income and thus can only purchase a few titles and like to get their money?s worth with multiple DIFFERENT play thrus.

Second, uh withholding content seems to be the best way to extend the games life. In fact it?s the only way i can think of. Whether it is keeping guns locked in muti-players like COD, or different characters like in WOW, or different story arcs like in DA:2. Personally i played L4D thousands of times without anything being withheld, but that was cuz i REALLY REALLY liked that gameplay, which is only personal preference, and cannot really be accounted for in game design.

Finally, dumb attempted cheap shot. Try to stay on point it u have something with some substance to say.

The average gamer US gamer is 34 years old so time is more likely to be the more limited resource than income. Your "we" still may not be most gamers.

You are right, games unlock more content as you play. It still feels like it is a cheap way to make your game go further by locking out a large chunk of content on your first play through. I don't just get to drop into the remaining content on the second play through, I have to go through all of the things I've already seen and done. If we are talking Bioware then that is a lot of text and cut scene that needs to be skipped.

You said that the game design for L4D doesn't account for the replay value. I disagree. It was designed to be played through over and over again without withholding any content. It is also nice how the story is in the back ground with visual cues, messages on walls etc. If you want to take your time and drink the game in you gather the story in a much more engaging way than the mountains of cut scenes used by other games. You can also blast through it and shoot zombies if you are not interested. That, to me, is good story telling in videogames. Not unskippable monologues from super soldiers.