surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I'll chime in with anyone that's expressing that I don't think Ward is necessarily expressing what you're concerned over.
Then again, I haven't really kept up with the man, so I don't know his personal definition of "story". Is it just plot, or is it a whole experience aside from the demand for input (that is, everything but the button presses, even up to how the characters execute their actions post-button-press)?
Then again, I haven't really kept up with the man, so I don't know his personal definition of "story". Is it just plot, or is it a whole experience aside from the demand for input (that is, everything but the button presses, even up to how the characters execute their actions post-button-press)?
First off, I don't think it's fair to use movies as an example when trying to make a point about video games. We should start talking about games within terms of games in terms of games if we want them to be considered their own unique form of expression.
Second, I don't think it's fair to boil a story down to its base elements and say that only characters matter. I could say that Luke Skywalker is a stereotypical youth that comes of age. Obi Wan is the teacher who helps him mature then dies to signify Luke's entrance into manhood. If you think about Star Wars is a prime example of a movie the recycles ancient character archetypes that are only made unique through the plot.
But still that would be oversimplifying things. Even in anciet forms of media like writing people argue to what extent story is a function of character and vice-versa. In games it's complicated by how character and context can serve gameplay. We don't know, and there haven't been many theorists to put it into words. We're all going on how we feel. "I feel like games with story are tiresome" "I feel confused when a game doesn't have a story."
Gameing is such a new medium for storytelling that we still don't know what works and what doesn't so I say bring it all on. If someone wants to make story the focal point then let's have it, what we need though is more people desseminating games and asking why it worked and why it didn't. All I get from this article is that you
Second, I don't think it's fair to boil a story down to its base elements and say that only characters matter. I could say that Luke Skywalker is a stereotypical youth that comes of age. Obi Wan is the teacher who helps him mature then dies to signify Luke's entrance into manhood. If you think about Star Wars is a prime example of a movie the recycles ancient character archetypes that are only made unique through the plot.
But still that would be oversimplifying things. Even in anciet forms of media like writing people argue to what extent story is a function of character and vice-versa. In games it's complicated by how character and context can serve gameplay. We don't know, and there haven't been many theorists to put it into words. We're all going on how we feel. "I feel like games with story are tiresome" "I feel confused when a game doesn't have a story."
Gameing is such a new medium for storytelling that we still don't know what works and what doesn't so I say bring it all on. If someone wants to make story the focal point then let's have it, what we need though is more people desseminating games and asking why it worked and why it didn't. All I get from this article is that you
First off, I don't think it's fair to use movies as an example when trying to make a point about video games. We should start talking about games within terms of games in terms of games if we want them to be considered their own unique form of expression.
Second, I don't think it's fair to boil a story down to its base elements and say that only characters matter. I could say that Luke Skywalker is a stereotypical youth that comes of age. Obi Wan is the teacher who helps him mature then dies to signify Luke's entrance into manhood. If you think about Star Wars is a prime example of a movie the recycles ancient character archetypes that are only made unique through the plot.
But still that would be oversimplifying things. Even in anciet forms of media like writing people argue to what extent story is a function of character and vice-versa. In games it's complicated by how character and context can serve gameplay. We don't know, and there haven't been many theorists to put it into words. We're all going on how we feel. "I feel like games with story are tiresome" "I feel confused when a game doesn't have a story."
Gameing is such a new medium for storytelling that we still don't know what works and what doesn't so I say bring it all on. If someone wants to make story the focal point then let's have it, what we need though is more people desseminating games and asking why it worked and why it didn't. All I get from this article is that you personally don't need story. Often by citing games that are celebrated for their story. I think your viewpoint is intriguing, but I think if you really thought anout you own opinions a tried to theorize on what makes games work you'd find that plot is more important than you think.
I wish this was a forum more open than the comments section of an article. There's so much to say and so little space to say it and so few to say it to.
Second, I don't think it's fair to boil a story down to its base elements and say that only characters matter. I could say that Luke Skywalker is a stereotypical youth that comes of age. Obi Wan is the teacher who helps him mature then dies to signify Luke's entrance into manhood. If you think about Star Wars is a prime example of a movie the recycles ancient character archetypes that are only made unique through the plot.
But still that would be oversimplifying things. Even in anciet forms of media like writing people argue to what extent story is a function of character and vice-versa. In games it's complicated by how character and context can serve gameplay. We don't know, and there haven't been many theorists to put it into words. We're all going on how we feel. "I feel like games with story are tiresome" "I feel confused when a game doesn't have a story."
Gameing is such a new medium for storytelling that we still don't know what works and what doesn't so I say bring it all on. If someone wants to make story the focal point then let's have it, what we need though is more people desseminating games and asking why it worked and why it didn't. All I get from this article is that you personally don't need story. Often by citing games that are celebrated for their story. I think your viewpoint is intriguing, but I think if you really thought anout you own opinions a tried to theorize on what makes games work you'd find that plot is more important than you think.
I wish this was a forum more open than the comments section of an article. There's so much to say and so little space to say it and so few to say it to.
I think you're taking what he's saying for the letter and not the meaning here, Holmes.
The "story" of a game as it were involves how the characters, world, and plot are conveyed to the player just as much as a bare-minimum leafing through the script's main events. Bioshock isn't about a dude who walks through a fishbowl for a few hours and shoots some people and turns out to be brain-washed, really. Well, I guess you could argue... oh, you get the point. In gaming "story" tends to relate to the whole of the narrative.
Then again, I don't like Adventure Time, so this might not be my place to comment in the first place.
The "story" of a game as it were involves how the characters, world, and plot are conveyed to the player just as much as a bare-minimum leafing through the script's main events. Bioshock isn't about a dude who walks through a fishbowl for a few hours and shoots some people and turns out to be brain-washed, really. Well, I guess you could argue... oh, you get the point. In gaming "story" tends to relate to the whole of the narrative.
Then again, I don't like Adventure Time, so this might not be my place to comment in the first place.
"I think story isn’t always the most important thing to game designers, but I wish it were. I think that the best games have stories, and when I eventually make games, story will be front and center."
I don't think a lot of commentators have looked carefully at Ward's quote(s). While there's nothing wrong with having a good story, shouldn't interactivity and gameplay take precedence? And given how many high-profile current generation games have stories that emulate films/TV shows (through the emphasis on non-interactive cutscenes) rather than taking advantage of the gaming's strengths/unique features, I can understand Holmes's concern.
And Holmes, keep up the good work. :) It seems some of the people here don't like gaming as much as I thought...
I don't think a lot of commentators have looked carefully at Ward's quote(s). While there's nothing wrong with having a good story, shouldn't interactivity and gameplay take precedence? And given how many high-profile current generation games have stories that emulate films/TV shows (through the emphasis on non-interactive cutscenes) rather than taking advantage of the gaming's strengths/unique features, I can understand Holmes's concern.
And Holmes, keep up the good work. :) It seems some of the people here don't like gaming as much as I thought...
@Xenodyne:
*checks author to see if Xenodyne is trolling*
*yup.jpg*
Did you really just assume Holmes was a cod fan?! Really?! Are you new?
*checks author to see if Xenodyne is trolling*
*yup.jpg*
Did you really just assume Holmes was a cod fan?! Really?! Are you new?
I think you may be confusing "story" with "plot", Holmes. Plot is the skeleton on which stories hang; the Totoro and Star Wars summaries you posted would, in screenwriting, be considered plots, not stories. The story is the plot plus the characters, the world, the themes, and all the other things that go into creating good stories. Resting solely on plot is bad writing. Most games have little more than a plot, but they think they have more, and they try to spoon-feed you uninteresting exposition like a movie does. That, I think, is what you don't want, Holmes; story in games is just fine, but most games don't know how to use interactivity to tell their stories, and that's where the issues you have come in.
Apologies if this has already been mentioned.
Apologies if this has already been mentioned.
I imagine he wants to make a game like Zelda, but with an open world like Fallout 3. Except with heavy more gaming culture references.
"I think it must have to do with the storyteller's culture in those industries, the ingrained belief that stories are what matters most, not all the other things that make film great."
But look at it this way Jon, directors like Michael Bay obviously don't care so much for story as much as they care for everything else that go into a movie (the action, the explosions, and all kinda of other things), and look how most of those movies come out. They usually, for lack of a better term, suck, and people will say so endlessly with reckless abandon.
But fast forward to when the numbers come in: Transformers: Dark of the Moon was one of the highest grossing movies ever, let alone the summer, and was nothing more then a rehash of Revenge of the Fallen(more or less). Theres a really weird line to be drawn from that.
Either the movie (or even a game, no matter how hard we try to keep the two mediums from being compared) sucks because it lacks a good story, or the movie still manages to capture a huge amount of money out of .. I don't know.. dumb luck? Or maybe just the fun of it, lol.. Its a weird double standard we happen to live in when it comes to entertainment.
You go on to say: "Narrative and plot take a backseat, so the show's incredibly charming, genuine, and good-natured characters, and the imaginative and unpredictable world they live in, can take the spotlight."
And for the world of TV and Movies (at least), with the way those industries tend to work, the usual day to days of those good-natured characters and imaginative and unpredictable worlds happens through the stories, no matter how unglued from one another those stories happen to be.
Its like Seinfeld, It was a show about nothing at all, yet you had characters that you knew because of the unhinged-from-the-greater-whole style of storytelling told you who they were. It wasn't new people each week, it was the same people, and because Jerry didn't want to dress like a pirate, or Elane danced like she was having a seizure, you came to know them, what to expect from them and continued to laugh at them no matter what this weeks STORY happen to be. Story was a guideline that needed to be there, and needs to be there in those 2 mediums, because otherwise you'd just have people sitting around doing nothing -and THATS no fun. Narrative doesn't take a back seat as much as it becomes an invisible hand guiding it all.
And that's probably the problem with comparing it to video games, and the need for story in video games, is the fact that the player themselves is (or should be) the invisible hand guiding the plot. But how much story becomes too much? Are we only meant to get the characters from point A to point B? and if the answer is no, then how do we actually shape the story ourselves, rather then just complete an ingrained laundry list of mandatory things?
Thats kinda of where games like Katamari and Monster Hunter work. Katamari and Monster Hunter have the loosest of narratives: Things need to happen, be it rolling wads of crap to fix your fathers galactic mess or the need to just go kill things for fun, profit and fame. Thats it. You go where you want, you do it how you wish, and people seem to really respond to that.
Other, more cinematic games, like Uncharted or Shadow of the Colossus, for two topical examples, don't always work so well, no matter how well received they are at the end of the day (like Bay's movies). They're always a "point A to point B" experience no matter what, even SotC that happens to have a fairly loose story itself -yet a story in which you have to do things by the numbers or your screwed.
It then becomes the difference between Star Wars and, say, Heroes, in a way. One allows your mind to wonder through this world (galaxy, really) with only the base tools build on, where the other keeps piling on one load of crap after another (after the first season) without giving the viewer a chance to breath or carve their own paths -the world is set in stone (like most games lead us into believing) and there's nothing we can do about it, no matter how restrictive it is.
Ultimately, both have a place, theres really no wrong way, whether or not both are good for everyone or not -it only becomes "wrong" when the companies aren't making enough money off of it, which is really a deeper issue for another time. It's like what it all comes down to after what Jim said in his D-toid original and what you said in your rebuttal, all that really matters is what games are the most fun for you.
(Sorry, Realize this went into "this should have been a blog" territory, but I kinda don't feel like going through the motions of moving it there.
But look at it this way Jon, directors like Michael Bay obviously don't care so much for story as much as they care for everything else that go into a movie (the action, the explosions, and all kinda of other things), and look how most of those movies come out. They usually, for lack of a better term, suck, and people will say so endlessly with reckless abandon.
But fast forward to when the numbers come in: Transformers: Dark of the Moon was one of the highest grossing movies ever, let alone the summer, and was nothing more then a rehash of Revenge of the Fallen(more or less). Theres a really weird line to be drawn from that.
Either the movie (or even a game, no matter how hard we try to keep the two mediums from being compared) sucks because it lacks a good story, or the movie still manages to capture a huge amount of money out of .. I don't know.. dumb luck? Or maybe just the fun of it, lol.. Its a weird double standard we happen to live in when it comes to entertainment.
You go on to say: "Narrative and plot take a backseat, so the show's incredibly charming, genuine, and good-natured characters, and the imaginative and unpredictable world they live in, can take the spotlight."
And for the world of TV and Movies (at least), with the way those industries tend to work, the usual day to days of those good-natured characters and imaginative and unpredictable worlds happens through the stories, no matter how unglued from one another those stories happen to be.
Its like Seinfeld, It was a show about nothing at all, yet you had characters that you knew because of the unhinged-from-the-greater-whole style of storytelling told you who they were. It wasn't new people each week, it was the same people, and because Jerry didn't want to dress like a pirate, or Elane danced like she was having a seizure, you came to know them, what to expect from them and continued to laugh at them no matter what this weeks STORY happen to be. Story was a guideline that needed to be there, and needs to be there in those 2 mediums, because otherwise you'd just have people sitting around doing nothing -and THATS no fun. Narrative doesn't take a back seat as much as it becomes an invisible hand guiding it all.
And that's probably the problem with comparing it to video games, and the need for story in video games, is the fact that the player themselves is (or should be) the invisible hand guiding the plot. But how much story becomes too much? Are we only meant to get the characters from point A to point B? and if the answer is no, then how do we actually shape the story ourselves, rather then just complete an ingrained laundry list of mandatory things?
Thats kinda of where games like Katamari and Monster Hunter work. Katamari and Monster Hunter have the loosest of narratives: Things need to happen, be it rolling wads of crap to fix your fathers galactic mess or the need to just go kill things for fun, profit and fame. Thats it. You go where you want, you do it how you wish, and people seem to really respond to that.
Other, more cinematic games, like Uncharted or Shadow of the Colossus, for two topical examples, don't always work so well, no matter how well received they are at the end of the day (like Bay's movies). They're always a "point A to point B" experience no matter what, even SotC that happens to have a fairly loose story itself -yet a story in which you have to do things by the numbers or your screwed.
It then becomes the difference between Star Wars and, say, Heroes, in a way. One allows your mind to wonder through this world (galaxy, really) with only the base tools build on, where the other keeps piling on one load of crap after another (after the first season) without giving the viewer a chance to breath or carve their own paths -the world is set in stone (like most games lead us into believing) and there's nothing we can do about it, no matter how restrictive it is.
Ultimately, both have a place, theres really no wrong way, whether or not both are good for everyone or not -it only becomes "wrong" when the companies aren't making enough money off of it, which is really a deeper issue for another time. It's like what it all comes down to after what Jim said in his D-toid original and what you said in your rebuttal, all that really matters is what games are the most fun for you.
(Sorry, Realize this went into "this should have been a blog" territory, but I kinda don't feel like going through the motions of moving it there.
@cody curry No, I've been here for a few years, just very rarely do I bother to comment (though that's become something I do end up doing, as evidenced by this post and the one previously). Also, I usually do not pay attention to who the author of most online articles are, unless I really like what they write. Sterling is a prime example, especially considering he's infamous.
Oh, and ya' know, us medium-large and large people need to stick together :D
That being said...
Sorry if I miscalled someone a CoD fan. I simply saw how he was derping around talking about story not being important to games, and when I came across this line:
"I don't know what it is about people who work in television and film that makes them want to shoehorn story into gaming."
I thought to myself: That sounds very similar to every COD player I've ever talked to. The "I didn't even know CoD had a single player mode" type of people.
What Holmes seems to be missing is how effective even a simple story can be. Take for example: The Legend of Zelda. Fairly simple story almost every game, Zelda gets kidnapped by the bad guy (usually one of the incarnations of Gannon) and it's up to you to save her. The fate of the world may/may not hang in the balance, though it usually comes into play.
From this simple story, we get character motivations. Why does Link do it? Because as the player, we strive to progress, for without progress, there would be no point in playing a game. Also, as a character, Link is trying to save Zelda because it's seen as the "right" thing to do. Link is a Hero, and thus it makes sense for him to save her.
Perhaps it isn't the best explanation. Let's move on to one of my more recent favorites.
The Mass Effect series is a stellar example of storytelling being at the forefront of gameplay. The basic plot boils down to Good Vs. Evil, with the fate of the whole cosmos hanging in the balance. It is through the story that we create our character, right through to the final act of Mass Effect 3. Not only are we sculpting the character's appearance and traits, but we are also sculpting his situational reactions. Without a Sci-fi story that is perhaps one of my favorites in recent years (seriously, I think it has one of the best SciFi universes unrelated to Star Trek/Wars), it would be impossible for this game to be even half as good.
Your argument is stupid. Without story, what is the person's motivation for completing it? I know I personally have a lot of trouble sitting down with most open world sandbox games simply because I end up wandering around for hours on end, and eventually getting bored of the experience.
Oh, and ya' know, us medium-large and large people need to stick together :D
That being said...
Sorry if I miscalled someone a CoD fan. I simply saw how he was derping around talking about story not being important to games, and when I came across this line:
"I don't know what it is about people who work in television and film that makes them want to shoehorn story into gaming."
I thought to myself: That sounds very similar to every COD player I've ever talked to. The "I didn't even know CoD had a single player mode" type of people.
What Holmes seems to be missing is how effective even a simple story can be. Take for example: The Legend of Zelda. Fairly simple story almost every game, Zelda gets kidnapped by the bad guy (usually one of the incarnations of Gannon) and it's up to you to save her. The fate of the world may/may not hang in the balance, though it usually comes into play.
From this simple story, we get character motivations. Why does Link do it? Because as the player, we strive to progress, for without progress, there would be no point in playing a game. Also, as a character, Link is trying to save Zelda because it's seen as the "right" thing to do. Link is a Hero, and thus it makes sense for him to save her.
Perhaps it isn't the best explanation. Let's move on to one of my more recent favorites.
The Mass Effect series is a stellar example of storytelling being at the forefront of gameplay. The basic plot boils down to Good Vs. Evil, with the fate of the whole cosmos hanging in the balance. It is through the story that we create our character, right through to the final act of Mass Effect 3. Not only are we sculpting the character's appearance and traits, but we are also sculpting his situational reactions. Without a Sci-fi story that is perhaps one of my favorites in recent years (seriously, I think it has one of the best SciFi universes unrelated to Star Trek/Wars), it would be impossible for this game to be even half as good.
Your argument is stupid. Without story, what is the person's motivation for completing it? I know I personally have a lot of trouble sitting down with most open world sandbox games simply because I end up wandering around for hours on end, and eventually getting bored of the experience.
Ah, didn't realize I was logged in under my FB instead of my Twitter. Anyways, I = Xenodyne (for those who couldn't tell based on possessive nouns referring to cody curry's post).
@George Booth or @Xenodyne or @whoever: I just really had to point out the glaring error in that comment as anyone who has been on this site long enough knows Holmes (like myself) doesn't like Brown and gray military shooters of any kind, that's all.
And I think ur misunderstanding the reason for the post. It's not a all or nothing thing, Johnathan's just saying Mario Bros can have a paper thin plot and still be a great game and so can games like chrono trigger. And on the note of sandbox games some people can become immersed in sandbox games and some cannot, it's just a matter of preference.
And Jim's really not troll. Trolls post stuff to annoy or anger people. Jim's post are ether for comic relief or news stories. But it does really annoy me when people continue to complain about him. Especially when he's not related to the article in any way.
And I think ur misunderstanding the reason for the post. It's not a all or nothing thing, Johnathan's just saying Mario Bros can have a paper thin plot and still be a great game and so can games like chrono trigger. And on the note of sandbox games some people can become immersed in sandbox games and some cannot, it's just a matter of preference.
And Jim's really not troll. Trolls post stuff to annoy or anger people. Jim's post are ether for comic relief or news stories. But it does really annoy me when people continue to complain about him. Especially when he's not related to the article in any way.
follow
