Gaming Question of the Month - How Important is Story? Gameplay over Story? Story over Gameplay?

YES! It's back, not in pog form, but thread form again! It's a revolution I tells ya!

So this months topic is something that came up a few months ago amongst the general gaming press. Spurred on mainly from comments by the always volatile David Jaffe, creator of the God of War and Twisted Metal franchises. David's basic outline on game development was that games shouldn't really attempt to tell a story and focus on the game mechanics instead because gaming isn't a medium fit enough to tell a truly deep and meaningful story. From what I can read between the lines on Jaffe's comments, he's basically saying that game mechanics will almost always inevitably get in the way of whatever story you're trying to tell, or by focussing more on telling a story you're naturally not going to have as strong a game mechanics as you could if you put all or the strong majority of time into those mechanics.

David Cage, the man behind heavy story focusses games such as Indigo Prophecy and Heavy Rain had a different outlook on the subject. His was something that clearly shows through in his games. It was that if you focus on making your mechanics unique and interesting enough, the actual physically strong nature of the mechanics could be overlooked somewhat if you're still telling a really heartfelt/strong/emotional/deep/etc. type of story.

Back in February, a game released on Steam that sort of sparked the whole story focus in game argument in many aspects. This game, was Dear Esther. Having played through the game ($10 on Steam, well worth the experience) I can say that if this is how story focuses in games want to go, then I am backing it with everything I've got.

Dear Esther basically consists of you walking around an island for around about an hour and a half to two hours. Intermittently you'll hear voice over from a mysterious persons seeming diary. The only pure game function you get is the ability to turn on a torch (that you lose about halfway through). There's no guns, no puzzles, no enemies, no jump button, no nothing basically. All you do is walk around an island and get minor clues to what might have happened in the preceding hours, days, months, years. It's pure story and pure atmosphere. It wasn't about precision, or being the best. It was all about soaking in what the game was presenting to you while listening to the tragic tale that was being told as you got to certain spots on the island.

So after all that exposition, the basic question being asked is how much do you take story into the equation when either buying or loving your games? Do you need a good and/or deep story in order to enjoy a single player story game? Would you take a game with a really good story if the mechanics of the game don't really match the standards of the story? Or do you rather a game that plays as strong as it can with as basic and cliched a story instead?

Can you find examples where story is the more blatant focus over gameplay? Or vice versa?

PREVIOUSLY ASKED QUESTIONS OF THE MONTH:
Are Boss Fights Necessary?
Is DLC a Good thing or a Bad thing?

HBK619 said:

gaming isn't a medium fit enough to tell a truly deep and meaningful story.

Click to expand...

The above quote is basically how, as a whole, the gaming industry can be summed up. Boring meangless games mass produced for kids. Because lets face it, that is what makes these companies money.

Not taking the time to make quality games (story and mechanics). But to produce games quick and simple.


An example of a game that decided the story was more important than the game mechanics (and personally I think it's better for it) is 'I am Alive' with some horrible mechanics but the atmosphere is totally engaging and really puts you in the environment.


Personally games that have horrible story lines (Single player) I tend not to finish, some are:

Darkness 2
Far Cry 2
Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising
Aliens vs Predator
Borderlands
Battlefield 3
Battlefield BC2
Brink

I guess you could call it my pile of shame. But it's not a shame because I'm not going back to finish them.



Some (IMO) that are good story wise:

I Am Alive
Portal 1 & 2
Trine 1 & 2
Magicka
Torchlight
Assassins Creed 2
Fallout 3
Bioshock 1 & 2

That's three questions.

I am a sucker for a good story. A good story is what will keep my playing the game. Game play is just an added bonus in games with a good story.

However obviously in sports games and what not there is no story (Unless you count my player/Road to Wrestlemanias) as a story. So game play is the big factor.

I think Uncharted did a brilliant job of having a great story and good game play to go without, but getting that good balance seems to be difficult for a lot of developers.

I love a game with a good story, but hate when it starts taking over the game. Long, often unskippable cutscenes after you reach a certain point can really sap the momentum from the game. It needs to get to the point, and get there quickly, or alternatively, tell the story through actual game play. Sure, tell missing plot points through a cut scene, but don't take 5 minutes of babble to get there.

That's the biggest problem i face with games with lots of cutscenes. Do i skip them and potentially miss something important, or do i sit through it and lose all the momentum i had. But really, in single player games gameplay is paramount for me, story will have a say as well, but the gameplay is what counts.

Going back a bit, Goldeneye on the N64 had very little story. Important info was told in-game, and how Bond got from the Surface to the Frigate to the Surface again wasn't entirely clear, but didn't really matter either because the game played so damn well, and kept every level fresh by adding side plots so you couldn't just barge through shooting and expect to pass the level.

But on the other hand, i've played through some pretty bad games just to see where the story took me. It may not happen often, but it can. Overall though i far prefer an enjoyable game with little or no story, than the other way around. Obviously a great game with a superb story is the best option, but if i have to take one or the other, give me gameplay.

silverscope said:

Personally games that have horrible story lines (Single player) I tend not to finish, some are:

Darkness 2

Click to expand...

Really?! Damn!

I picked up Darkness 2 after loving what Darkness did. I realise that The Darkness was fundamentally flawed in A LOT of areas, I'd probably only realistically give the game about a 7-8/10. I picked up The Darkness for about $5 at a GAME sale a couple of years ago and had only decided to put it in after really enjoying The Darkness 2's demo.

In terms of story and atmosphere I was absolutely sucked in. I won't mention the moment, but the 'big' moment in the game is one of the more emotional moments in a game I've ever had. And there's another moment later on in the game, with an old lady that had just as big of an emotional moment, only because she had been around for the whole game and you're sort of forced to think one way and then suddenly it's totally not the thing you thought.

It was one of those games where story and world atmosphere prevailed over horrible and outdated (only outdated because I was playing it in 2012) controls. And really, quite limited Darkness powers.

I've got The Darkness 2 lined up to play next, but it's disappointing to hear that the story doesn't continue as well as the first game. Or did you not like that too? Did you ever actually play the first?

I know what you mean in regards to Far Cry 2, I ground that one out. I had started the game once before and gave up halfway through, traded it in, but when it was $15 on the PSN a little while back I decided to buy it again and see if I could get through, just for that accomplishment of finishing the game.

Really, once you've played half the game, you don't need to play the 2nd half. Story wise, there's nothing really going on anywhere near as close to the first half (and the big decision halfway through that's not really that big of a decision anyway) and even then the first half was fairly dull at best. And gameplay wise nothing really different happens that makes it move into a great and wonderful experience.

It's a decent, but very flawed game once again. I really think Far Cry 3 will rectify a lot of the issues, from what I've seen so far, they're well on track.

HBK619 said:

Really?! Damn!


I've got The Darkness 2 lined up to play next, but it's disappointing to hear that the story doesn't continue as well as the first game. Or did you not like that too? Did you ever actually play the first?

I know what you mean in regards to Far Cry 2, I ground that one out. I had started the game once before and gave up halfway through, traded it in, but when it was $15 on the PSN a little while back I decided to buy it again and see if I could get through, just for that accomplishment of finishing the game.

Really, once you've played half the game, you don't need to play the 2nd half. Story wise, there's nothing really going on anywhere near as close to the first half (and the big decision halfway through that's not really that big of a decision anyway) and even then the first half was fairly dull at best. And gameplay wise nothing really different happens that makes it move into a great and wonderful experience.

It's a decent, but very flawed game once again. I really think Far Cry 3 will rectify a lot of the issues, from what I've seen so far, they're well on track.

Click to expand...

I never played the first Darkness so take my opinion about the story with a grain of salt. Personally I just found the story boring and I didn't enjoy it. But you may pick it up and love it from the start.

As with any game you really need to play it yourself to see if you enjoy it or not. So I wouldn't put it away just yet. Give it a go and you may like it. It was just a game I didn't enjoy.


As for Far Cry2 well the whole "world" was just plain boring. Go to checkpoint, kill enemy, go to mission, kill enemy, collect this and re-do !

an interesting/intriguing narrative is the most important part of a great game. that said, there needs to be a balance; i cbf slogging through really tedious gameplay even if the story is good.

a good recent example is Nier. not fantastic in terms of gameplay, but the story was great so i got right into it and loved it.

full disclosure: i'm a jrpgwhore.

Gameplay > Story

Here's a good example that I like to use.

GTA IV: Story was very good and long but the gameplay was lacking. After you completed the story there was basically nothing to do.

Saints Row 2: Story was decent but it was very short. However the gameplay more than made up for it, there's just so many things to do after you finish the story.

In conclusion: Played GTA IV for 30 hours and sold it after I finished the story. As for Saints Row 2 I've probably gotten at least 200 hours out of this game and I still play it.

Gameplay is much more important but that doesn't mean you can have a crappy story and get away with it. It still needs to be acceptable but it doesn't need to be superb if the gameplay makes up for it.

Interesting question my favorite Mass Effect is the original due to it's superior story line.

Compared to 2 & 3 the gameplay is clunky however it still isn't enough to kill the game for me. Obviously there is a tipping point, if something is unplayable it doesn't matter how good it's story is.

silverscope said:

I never played the first Darkness so take my opinion about the story with a grain of salt. Personally I just found the story boring and I didn't enjoy it. But you may pick it up and love it from the start.

Click to expand...

Started it the other night, just felt like getting some FPS in my gaming.

I was not liking it much after the first mission, but once you get back to the mansion and get to walk around a bit. I fell in love.

Absolutely fantastic so far. I'd say I'm around halfway through...not 100% sure.

But right now it's nailing both gameplay and story. Something the first game definitely didn't.

I'm getting a HUGE Max Payne vibe from the whole game. Just has that same eerie, mystical feeling crossed with the real world stuff. And the slower moments in the game are incredibly engrossing for me.

Then on the gameplay side there's the solid gunplay with the extremely fun to use Darkness powers, it never gets old grabbing a guy and ripping him in half.

And despite the loss of main voice talent and original developer. There's a really nice pick up from where we left point, even if the gameplay is considerably more linear than the first (both good and bad).

BTW, I completely forgot to give my own answer. I'll put that one up in a few days. I like the Goldeneye example used earlier though.

Im much more in the story camp than gameplay. A good story is the most important part to a game for me. Well, in relation to games that I would consider my favourites.

As Quivorir mentioned, Uncharted did a great job at both, but it was 100% the story that made me love it. Great characters, you were able to develop a bond on an emotional level with them, and you actually cared about their fate.
Possible Uncharted spoiler below.

Elder Scrolls series is another with great stories. I have played them for the quests, and the lore (Bethesda is unrivaled in this area). I read all the books I find, and I play through every storyline.

Sure, I enjoy games with the main focus people gameplay, but nothing beats a game with a great story.

I like the right balance of both.

As mentioned above, I keep going back to Portal 1 on my PC because it has a great combination of a good and interesting story with entertaining gameplay.

HBK - you should add a poll, FWIW.

Igloo said:

Possible Uncharted spoiler below.

Spoiler

Really, who didn't want Elena and Drake to fall in love

Click to expand...

Me.

This is why I love the Metal Gear series. Like watching a movie and playing an awesome game in one.

A good balance of both is ideal, as Eth pointed out Portal 1 is a good example of this, no surprise that Portal 2 also fits the category of games that get the balance right. Uncharted series would be another, sure its cliché but its interesting enough and the characters are fun, Bioshock 1 and lets not forget Metal Gear Solid, like Dan said, pretty much playing a movie.

But if devs dont get it right then you would have to take gameplay over story any day of the week. Heavy Rain is probably the only exception for some where story takes so much more precedence over gameplay, yet the game is enjoyable enough to put up with hours of QTEs just to see what happens next, that could also be because the game is unique compared to everything else on the market.

Most games nowadays are gameplay 1st, story 2nd with the CoD series as its poster boy. I have completed all the CoD campaigns and only Black Ops stood out for me story wise, i cant remember any key points in any of the other campaigns. The series is built on blowing s**t up and shooting as being the memorable moments you take away from them as opposed to something like Heavy Rain where you care for what happens to the characters and are interested in their outcomes.

The test i use to see if a game is interesting story wise is if my non gaming missus watches me play it if shes reading a book or not in the room, its because im playing CoD or Battlefield

The trouble in this day and age is gameplay sells, not many devs take the risk with a rewarding story when they can make an easy buck off mindless gameplay ala CoD

So, my answer to this age old question has come.

Personally, I think at the end of the day, nowadays I'd prefer a good story over good/great game mechanics.

I think the medium of gaming has become such that a really well done story can be that much more immersive and enthralling because it does feel like YOU are the one that's having the story. Nobody else. Movies and TV these days can often feel so disconnected imo. Gaming connects you like nothing else for mine.

And with the technology as advanced as it is today where we can see branching stories, dialogue tree's, etc. that help to sculpt the story landscape to a state that in many games now no 2 stories are alike. The Heavy Rain thread was full of numerous people that had played and finished the game, yet had completely different ending scenario's.

Mass Effect has taken to this with aplomb by affecting not just the one standalone game, but 2 other titles with story choices.

I'm not necessarily one that is willing to completely overlook horrible game mechanics though. As long as the game is competent I will stick with it, but if there's some genuinely broken controls here I won't bother.

It's actually why I'm tentatively looking forward to playing recently released PSN game Datura. From what I've heard the gameplay mechanics aren't the best, but the story/atmosphere/immersion is top notch. So I really want to see how it pans out.

2 big examples of titles I've overlooked because of broken/unworkable game mechanics to me, are Alpha Protocol and I Am Alive. Both games I was looking forward to for a period of time, both delayed heavily and both ended up with pretty terrible control mechanics. From what I've heard, both have pretty damn good stories if you stick with it. But I just don't think I can overlook the broken mechanics just to grab those stories.

As a younger kid though, definitely the priority was on gameplay. I think the example of Goldeneye earlier by Sugar Shane was very apt. When you think about it, there wasn't much doing story wise, but the gameplay was so tight and crisp and fun that it didn't matter. I think I replayed that campaign at least 4 or 5 times. I could think of plenty more examples back in the past where it was gameplay and gameplay only, but that's for the nostalgia thread.

Mentioning in my OP about Dear Esther where it wasn't about super tight controls or anything like that...not even the possibility of being able to jump. But it's a game that doesn't add clunk to the controls so you're just easily able to experience the story as the dev and writer wanted you to. There's nothing to stumble over in order to find the story, so it's very much one of the perfect examples of how story gets over gameplay but can still work enough in harmony.

So personally. Probably nowadays I'm more on the bandwagon of story>gameplay. Of course a good mix of both is the best (Uncharted being one of the biggest stand outs in that area). But still not really going to pass up a gameplay>story game either.

The best gaming stories come from games that offer truly open sandbox elements. No writer has made a more captivating story than the need to group together to survive the wild west that was 'Ultima Online' on release, or living in a universe with massive player controlled corporations and the player controlled economy of 'EVE Online, or even to a lesser extent the world building in 'Minecraft'.

The best recent example of this can be seen in the 'Day Z' mod for ARMA II. The game provides a platform... an openness that forces people to interact beyond the realms of scripted scenario and to form their own stories which can be seen in the huge amount of YT videos and forum posts. There is a reason why this mod is taking off in such a huge way, and that's simply because the narratives we form ourselves and the emotional investment that they require will always have a substantially more satisfying pay-off than any character written by another human being, no matter how good the quality of the writing or scripting in the game is.

What was your issue with Alpha Protocol? I played through it on PC and really enjoyed it (though EZ-mode because the pistol is incredibly overpowered and stealth is so easy.)

My answer to the question is: I can play through Grim Fandango or Torment in my sleep. Yet I've replayed both many times because the story is so good (in spite of GF's poor game mechanics). I can't see myself ever playing Just Cause 2 again because despite its fun gameplay I just didn't care about any of it.

MarcusP2 said:

What was your issue with Alpha Protocol? I played through it on PC and really enjoyed it (though EZ-mode because the pistol is incredibly overpowered and stealth is so easy.)

Click to expand...

The deliberate gimping of numerous aspects of the gameplay (aiming for one) that basically makes you struggle and grind instead of enjoying. I don't find aiming s**t because I don't have stats in that area fun, where is the skill in that?

Also the lack of true variety, you're basically forced to play only a few specifically certain ways otherwise it's going to be a hell of a time. That wasn't exactly what they advertised (and what I was looking forward to), I was looking forward to a true moulding of a character how I wanted, not something that I had to do to avoid the most frustration.

Basically, I wanted this game:
[YOUTUBE]xKvjr0g9SFM[/YOUTUBE]
That's not what it was.

I think the answer comes with the age of the gamer myself, i know in the earlier days (teens) all i wanted was a game i could play as long as possable (that would count as gameplay) but now i crave for a game that has a deep story to keep me immersed as long as possible.
BUT after saying that if the story is first rate and the gameplay is slow and dull, people will leave it behind and move on, so there still needs to be some balance there.

Kinda late but I thought I'd still put in my two cents worth. I read an interesting artice the other day about two differing views of reasons why people are enticed by games. On one side was this guy who liked the story, the atmosphere and the whole interactivity in a story being played out. The other really enjoyed the opportunities he was provided gameplay wise because of the story and plot. The mechanics present or implemented because of the particular story being told. When looking at trailers he thought not about how the story would potentially unfold but about what gameplay opportunities would be afforded to him because of the story and the setting. Because gameplay on it's own is meaningless unless it's backed by something relatable, something that you enjoy, something that brings it all together and ties it up. There has to be at least a shell of a converging factor to make a game truly enjoyable and the way you do that is relate elements of the game smoothly.

I suppose my point in saying all that was I think I belong in the latter camp, I enjoy the story present in games, especially if it's a well told but I tend to think I enjoy the gameplay moreso. But this is only if it has a competent story to meld everything together.

Swear i had posts in this thread about halo...weird