Too much story in modern games? *spawn

[Prophecy2k]

Most of those things are synonyms for "story."

Who is the main character of Sudoku? What's the setting of Tetris? What's the atmosphere of Words With Friends?

There are a variety of games where adding "plot" and "narrative" make the game less appealing to a lot of people, because for certain kinds of games, they're obstructions to the enjoyment. For example, I don't think Sudoku would be more popular if you had to click through cutscenes or read narrative text or whatever it would take to add a "narrative" and a "plot" to the game. The story modes in fighting games are not only widely panned, but fans of them explicitly express a complete lack of desire for a story. Same with sports games--no one wants drama in the next version of Madden NFL or FIFA.

I'm guessing you don't much care for those sorts of games, which is fine. To each his own. The problem is it appears that people like you run a lot of game companies and incorrectly assume everyone has the same desire to know what kind of person Yellow Triangle Bird is on the inside.

I'm not sure whether you're just listing games and genres for arguments' sake, or whether you really didn't understand my line of discussion and the entire topic of this conversation in the first place.

The topic is, "Is there too much story in modern games?" - A topic which follows on from the increasing sentiment of some gamers on the internet that modern games in the more mainstream genres that make up the majority of AAA console gaming, are becoming too story-focussed and aren't placing enough emphasis on gameplay.

To take part in this conversation one should at least be able to comprehend the implicit understanding that the genres of games in question do not include stuff like, puzzle games, sports games, fighting games, board games, racing games etc etc.

Those aren't the games people are complaining about, because developers for the most part aren't trying to shoehorn scripted scenes, QTEs and cutscenes into those games.

It's painfully obvious then to anyone who has been following the line of discussion from the beginning of this thread that my comments refer only to the big action type shooter/adventure/RPG/whizz bang pop type game genres that make up the lion's share of AAA console gaming.

So, please stop taking my posts out of context and projecting my comments across all genres of games, when it is painfully obvious both from the line of discourse, and from the thread title in the first place, that I wasn't referring to ALL games. Also, don't try to assume you know what games I play and don't play simply because I'm expressing views which aren't demonising story in games in general the way other sensationalist and hyperbolic internet posters are.

All the examples you then listed above as exceptions to my points are moot, because we haven't been taking about those kinds of games in this thread from the beginning.

The point of the thread is that people are complaining that action/adventure/shooter/RPG/platformer games are becoming too story driven. It's a sentiment that's worthy of discussion, beacause there exists a real observable trend that might justify such a feeling.

Mentioning sports games, puzzlers, racing games, fighters, multiplayer games etc adds nothing because those games have never been principally story driven, and there are no current trends indicating such a direction for those games.

Also, characters, setting, atmosphere and plot are not synonyms for story. They're encompassed by the word "narrative", something that's been already established in this thread. If you want to hold to such a definition then go right ahead, but understand that your definition and my meaning when I made my statement are not the same. So it would be a fools errand to go about interpreting someone else's statement by your own personal incorrect definition of terms used, when the other's person's definition has already been clearly laid out and definined in the thread.

 

[Rodéric]

I'd like to add that it's not only that they are more story driven, but it's they are less interactive.

There are too many moment in a "modern" game during which we become spectators instead of actors, and that's what many of us dislike.


As a side note I'd like to point of other trends that are wrong in games, such as pay-to-win, milk gameplay because of subscription fee, ultra violence, lottery rewards/grinding, forced unlocks [no multiplayer FPS ever dared do that in the old days!]...
Some of those trends clearly derivate from merchandising (ie making money over making art [for a definition of art check your dictionnary it's way broader than you likely think]), others seem to come from the will to imitate movies or series, as if there was no way to be popular but to imitate something already popular. [That very idea might be the key reason most MMORPG are WoW clones.]

I don't know whether anyone is interested in broadening the topic about video games shortcomings and current trends.

 

[Prophecy2k]

I'd like to add that it's not only that they are more story driven, but it's they are less interactive.

Can I ask Rodéric why you would think that video games on consoles are becoming less interactive?

I know that games in general are shorter this generation. And I expect that with the same level of narrative exposition as last gen, but with less crafted gameplay segments, it's obvious how someone would then say that games are now less interactive, as the ratio of "play-time" to "watch-time" is reduced.

That's a gross generalisation though, and certainly not true for all games. But still, it's undeniable that games in the most popular genres (i.e. action/adventure/shooter/platformer) are much shorter these days.

Perhaps that is the reason Rodéric?

 

[Rodéric]

You are correct, I solely based it on the amount of time you watch instead of play, and I'm talking about a trend, which obviously means there are exceptions.



Yet another trend is making games easier. (their gameplay slower, giving you options [equipment/skills/...] slowly...)

 

[fearsomepirate]

forced unlocks [no multiplayer FPS ever dared do that in the old days!]...

Console FPSes have had unlockables going back to the N64.

 

[Prophecy2k]

You are correct, I solely based it on the amount of time you watch instead of play, and I'm talking about a trend, which obviously means there are exceptions.



Yet another trend is making games easier. (their gameplay slower, giving you options [equipment/skills/...] slowly...)

Ah, then i agree with you that it is a tad concerning. But I wonder whether that's more of a function of ballooning developement budgets (compared to last gen), and a misallocation of resources (i.e. distribution of devopment time and focus on crafting and polishing the narrative sections of the game, over the base gameplay)?

I also wonder whether publisher perception of gamer expectations regarding game content is an factor, given that many gamers these days expect a solid SP and a plethora of different competitive and coop MP options in their games for a title to be worth its asking price. With many devs struggling to balance a fixed budget and thus schedule, whilst still trying to pack in so many extra modes, one wonders whether shorter SP modes are a function of these kinds of practices?

Re your comment about games being easier, I agree that its a trend. Although being easier is not so much a bad thing in and of itself, however its the simplifying (read "streamlining") part of that process that is justifiably in my opinion the biggest bane of the current console games industry. Why publishers seem to regard console gamers as dumb idiots, incapable of independant thought, and just looking for a cheap quick fix I have no idea.

While I don't want to blame stuff like the more recent americanisation of the global console games industry over the last gen, I do think it may have had a role in the effective dumbing down of AAA console games in the various genres. Games which have proved popular in the past with solid gameplay and complex mechanics and gameplay systems, have been ruined this gen in an attempt to make those games appeal to some "broad" homogenised consumerbase, who in reality doesn't exist.

 

[Rodéric]

Ah, then i agree with you that it is a tad concerning. But I wonder whether that's more of a function of ballooning developement budgets (compared to last gen), and a misallocation of resources (i.e. distribution of devopment time and focus on crafting and polishing the narrative sections of the game, over the base gameplay)?

In my experience games spent far too little time in pre-production, far less time than, say, movies, since games seem to like being compared to them.
Games are both graphic (like animes/movies/series) and interactive, in pre production, both aspect should get a lot of attention. I think gameplay should be tested with basic geometry to work on the flow of the game and levels, and only after it's been established should the artists make them pretty. (following the storyboards/concept art)
[Note that a few company do it like that, including Nintendo.]

I also wonder whether publisher perception of gamer expectations regarding game content is an factor, given that many gamers these days expect a solid SP and a plethora of different competitive and coop MP options in their games for a title to be worth its asking price. With many devs struggling to balance a fixed budget and thus schedule, whilst still trying to pack in so many extra modes, one wonders whether shorter SP modes are a function of these kinds of practices?

That might be ridiculous but I'm under the impression that a number of people got an initial comparison wrong.
At one point games *budgets* have been compared to movies *budgets*, and from there it seems people thought games had to be compared to movies... (and so/then become like them)

They are different things, there's nothing wrong in getting what fits from somewhere else, but trying to make a movie and inserting short gameplay sequences in the middle are reminescent of what gamers always thought as bad "licence" games.

Re your comment about games being easier, I agree that its a trend. Although being easier is not so much a bad thing in and of itself, however its the simplifying (read "streamlining") part of that process that is justifiably in my opinion the biggest bane of the current console games industry. Why publishers seem to regard console gamers as dumb idiots, incapable of independant thought, and just looking for a cheap quick fix I have no idea.

I do not know either, and when I think about it, it seems incoherent.
On one hand they have all those hints on screen, little freedom and so on, but on the other they ask gamers to master a gamepad, which isn't exactly the most intuitive device...

I'm not sure what to make of the controllers we have today, do we really need all those buttons ?
Is someone thinking that having a lot of buttons which are only useful in limited circumstances equals offering any useful freedom or gameplay ?
It just sounds like it's a wrong emphasis, when is reloading (a weapon) really strategic in a game ? Is it worth having it if it's just a routine/reflex action ?

While I don't want to blame stuff like the more recent americanisation of the global console games industry over the last gen, I do think it may have had a role in the effective dumbing down of AAA console games in the various genres. Games which have proved popular in the past with solid gameplay and complex mechanics and gameplay systems, have been ruined this gen in an attempt to make those games appeal to some "broad" homogenised consumerbase, who in reality doesn't exist.

I agree.

Everyone is different, everyone has his/her own taste, trying to appeal to everyone doesn't strikes me as a good idea, and games such as Minecraft, Wasteland 2, and DayZ are proving that you can make good profits making something *you* would like to play, as opposed to "industry standard".

 

[tuna]

It just sounds like it's a wrong emphasis, when is reloading (a weapon) really strategic in a game ? Is it worth having it if it's just a routine/reflex action ?

In games like Binary Domain, when you reload is one of few tactical descisions you make.

 

[fearsomepirate]

It just sounds like it's a wrong emphasis, when is reloading (a weapon) really strategic in a game ? Is it worth having it if it's just a routine/reflex action ?

Reloading is a big deal. It forces you to maintain proximity to cover, since you need to be out of enemy fire when you reload it. I don't notice it so much now that it's in every FPS, but the fact is that Doom and Serious Sam can be played much differently than Call of Duty due to the constant stream of bullets you're able to put out. It's absolutely necessary in any shooter that wants to have a semblance of realism, though obviously not every shooter needs to be that kind of game!

 

[swym]

There are a variety of games where adding "plot" and "narrative" make the game less appealing to a lot of people, because for certain kinds of games, they're obstructions to the enjoyment. For example, I don't think Sudoku would be more popular if you had to click through cutscenes or read narrative text or whatever it would take to add a "narrative" and a "plot" to the game. The story modes in fighting games are not only widely panned, but fans of them explicitly express a complete lack of desire for a story. Same with sports games--no one wants drama in the next version of Madden NFL or FIFA.

I actually think I can argue even about the genres you mention here:
Story mode in fighting games is usually a tacked-on experience with convoluted short scenes between fights. Most of the games in the genre don't even care, but the few that do - like Def Jam: Fight for NY (which is more of a brawler actually) - managed to have a plot decent enough to get you playing through the entire single player campaign. Even the latest Mortal Kombat had a surprisingly decent plot with a nice twist on how the original trilogy unfolds.

And I think the same applies to sports and racing games: Fight Night champion added the "champion mode" single player campaign which gets you through a full length plot - something that made it much more compelling to play than previous games in the series. Some other sports games (mainly individual and extreme sports) also had a story mode that added quite a bit to the experience (Skate for example). And even racing games like Midnight Club and the recent Driver: San Fransisco benefited from a single player story mode. I actually find it very gratifying to have a nice cutscene rolling after an endurance race that leaves your palms sweaty - not only that it drives the story forward, but it also changes the pace and gives you some time to relax your hands before tackling the next objective.

As for Sudoku: we've already seen how Puzzle Quest revolutionized the puzzle genre by adding both RPG mechanics and a plot. Why don't you think that a game like Sudoku can benefit from such a thing? Sudoku quests sounds like a good premise
But you know what, let's drop Sudoku altogether and look at other games in the puzzle genre: what are the best puzzle games that you played in recent years? Mine where Braid, Portal, Limbo and World of Goo. And the common thing about all of these is a gratifying story told throughout the game itself (be it via dialog in Portal, via the books telling the backstory in braid, the thin references in Limbo or even the comic relief of the sign painter in WoG). Can you imagine playing Portal on mute with no subtitles? You will still get a very decent puzzle game, but can it even be compared to the impact of having Glados constantly taunting you throughout the game?

And I don't think this is just a common theme in recent years. After all, what are all the classic graphic adventure games if not just a series of puzzles connected together by more or less interactive dialog pieces (aka cutscenes)? I think that every game in every genre can benefit

when is reloading (a weapon) really strategic in a game ? Is it worth having it if it's just a routine/reflex action ?

Well, the active reload mechanic in Gears of War is definitely a worthy addition. I'm surprised we haven't seen too many other games copying this mechanic.

 

[dragonelite]

A bit direction is okey but games like i have to name it uncharted and most of the modern AAA titles is just to scripted. Something like Skyrim and Zelda you can choose to play the main story line or go exploring and most of the time it also awards you like Extra heart Pieces or bigger bombs and quivers sizes.

 

[Prophecy2k]

Story/Narrative =/= Linearity dragonelite.

What you're talking about is a separate issue altogether and is not really the purpose of this thread.

It's fine for you to not like linearity in games. There are lots of games that are very non-linear. Probably more in fact this gen than any other (particularly with the rise and popularity of the "open world" game). So no-one can concievably complain that games are becoming too linear.

The question of narrative however is entirely different.

 

[fearsomepirate]

As for Sudoku: we've already seen how Puzzle Quest revolutionized the puzzle genre by adding both RPG mechanics and a plot.

There are far more people playing plotless versions of falling block puzzles than Puzzle Quest.

One the problems with adding, say, a dorky swords-and-sorcery plot to a puzzle game is that fantasy dorkery has a much narrower appeal than a straight puzzle. Not that there isn't a certain subset of people who find that sort of thing appealing, but there is a huge set of people who find it a turnoff.

But you know what, let's drop Sudoku altogether and look at other games in the puzzle genre: what are the best puzzle games that you played in recent years?

You're talking past me. I'm talking about everybody. You're talking about yourself. Here's my point--there are lots of people for whom story is a big turnoff. The majority of the 20 million people who bought it would have showed zero interest in Wii Fit if it had been the story of a fat, emo talking raven in a postapocalyptic wasteland trying to lose weight so that he could fit through the portal leading to the land of zombies so he could defeat the six-story tall big-titted boss in the revealing chain bikini.

And yeah, there are people who lap that stuff up, but they're not 99% of the game-playing population, so there's no reason for 99% of the industry should be a love song to them.

So, your response is that you personally love stories is a misdirected response. If what we're talking about is, "If the game industry made nothing but what I personally like, what would it make," the answer is "First-person shooters and turn-based strategy." But so what? Devoting an entire industry to one man's personal preferences is something only narcissistic dictators get to do.

 

[Bigduo209]

So wait, is this thread about too much story in games? Like how certain games shouldn't have a story in the first place.

Or is it about how stories in games are executed in mostly one certain way? As in point A to point B with interactive set-pieces sprinkled in.

With the former I strongly disagree, and with the latter I find it tiresome sometimes (Uncharted and God Of War are exceptions to me).

 

[Prophecy2k]

There are far more people playing plotless versions of falling block puzzles than Puzzle Quest.

One the problems with adding, say, a dorky swords-and-sorcery plot to a puzzle game is that fantasy dorkery has a much narrower appeal than a straight puzzle. Not that there isn't a certain subset of people who find that sort of thing appealing, but there is a huge set of people who find it a turnoff.

You're talking past me. I'm talking about everybody. You're talking about yourself. Here's my point--there are lots of people for whom story is a big turnoff. The majority of the 20 million people who bought it would have showed zero interest in Wii Fit if it had been the story of a fat, emo talking raven in a postapocalyptic wasteland trying to lose weight so that he could fit through the portal leading to the land of zombies so he could defeat the six-story tall big-titted boss in the revealing chain bikini.

And yeah, there are people who lap that stuff up, but they're not 99% of the game-playing population, so there's no reason for 99% of the industry should be a love song to them.

So, your response is that you personally love stories is a misdirected response. If what we're talking about is, "If the game industry made nothing but what I personally like, what would it make," the answer is "First-person shooters and turn-based strategy." But so what? Devoting an entire industry to one man's personal preferences is something only narcissistic dictators get to do.

I need to clarify something here. You're making sweeping statements based on nothing but your own personal conjecture. You have absolutely no facts to substantiate your claims, and in actuality I don't think its even possible to find said facts, short of surveying the entire human race (an insurmountable task).

None of us know how many people like games with stories in them, over those who don't. You trying to make out that swym's comments were rooted in his own personal opinions, yet at the same time you make sweeping statements based on nothing but your own personal opinion is just disingenuous.

The only evidence I can think of, that speaks to the numbers of gamers that like stories in their games, over gamers that don't, is that publishers who do lots of market research and data gathering and analysis, are currently making lots of very heavy story heavy/driven games. Surely that says a lot more than just someone's own personal conjecture.

 

[Prophecy2k]

So wait, is this thread about too much story in games? Like how certain games shouldn't have a story in the first place.

Or is it about how stories in games are executed in mostly one certain way? As in point A to point B with interactive set-pieces sprinkled in.

With the former I strongly disagree, and with the latter I find it tiresome sometimes (Uncharted and God Of War are exceptions to me).

I would say that both are valid points for discussion. I would agree with your position on both points too, although on the second i could name quite a few more titles I consider exceptions.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

So wait, is this thread about too much story in games? Like how certain games shouldn't have a story in the first place.

Or is it about how stories in games are executed in mostly one certain way? As in point A to point B with interactive set-pieces sprinkled in.

How's about you read it and find out?

 

[Gubbi]

So wait, is this thread about too much story in games? Like how certain games shouldn't have a story in the first place.

Or is it about how stories in games are executed in mostly one certain way? As in point A to point B with interactive set-pieces sprinkled in.

With the former I strongly disagree, and with the latter I find it tiresome sometimes (Uncharted and God Of War are exceptions to me).

The thread was spawned off a different thread. I'm listed at first poster in this thread, but I *did* not write the thread title, nor do I have a beef with story in games.

My objection is with the way story is told in games. Games are interactive media. The more cutscenes, the less interaction, the worse the game (in general).

Cheers

 

[fearsomepirate]

You have absolutely no facts to substantiate your claims

There are over 100 million people playing games on Facebook...in the USA alone. Zynga has 220 million active users. That's more than all current-gen home game console sales combined.
http://www.viralblog.com/social-media/why-social-games-are-so-popular-on-facebook/

The only evidence I can think of, that speaks to the numbers of gamers that like stories in their games, over gamers that don't, is that publishers who do lots of market research and data gathering and analysis, are currently making lots of very heavy story heavy/driven games.

Angry Birds is at over 500 million downloads. I don't think Darksiders has quite gotten there yet. Maybe next year, right? I'm sure we're just on the cusp of comic book melodrama going mainstream, right?

 

[tuna]

There are over 100 million people playing games on Facebook...in the USA alone. Zynga has 220 million active users. That's more than all current-gen home game console sales combined.
http://www.viralblog.com/social-media/why-social-games-are-so-popular-on-facebook/

Angry Birds is at over 500 million downloads. I don't think Darksiders has quite gotten there yet. Maybe next year, right? I'm sure we're just on the cusp of comic book melodrama going mainstream, right?

People seem quite willing to PAY for story based games, so that is why we are getting them.