Depends on the game. Adventure games like myst are all about immersion and plot. However, in Doom 3 the pda stuff was annoying. In system shock 2, the same pda concept worked very well.

Quote:

Original post by Ketchaval Tying in with Wavinator's thoughts on genre (ie. multigenre games), I've noticed that one of the "problems" with the game buying audience is that they don't seem to be as interested in the writing (ie. word-building / character building as seen in character lines, voice acting, character design, level design, level design, plot, story and themes). As they are in the gameplay.

It's not necessarily true, and to large degree depends on the game genre. I don't think Knights of the Old Republic or Final Fantasy 7 got so popular because they had some revolutionary game mechanics -- on the contrary, they were mostly utilizing concepts already done to death ( FF_7_ ffs...) There's also adventure games, whole genre which is practically all about telling some kind of story and where 'gameplay' is nearly non-existant. You walk, you talk, you occasionally combine pair of objects and that's it, everything revolves around the plot. And finally, it'll also depend on the person in question. Personally, i mostly play games because i want to see how the plot develops and how it's all going to end. Sure, there's all the jumping and shooting and stuff involved, but it all just makes a part of the final story that's to extent my own doing.

Maybe I'm unique, but I actually play games for the story. Sure, playing an online FPS like Enemy Territory is fun, but there's just nothing behind it. I like to think of RPGs as "interactive story-books" and I always look for games with a nice plot. When I first played FFVIII, I was so engrossed into the story that I played it literally all day and night, just to find out what happens next. That game actually made me cry (twice!) and remains the only game that has ever impacted me to that degree.


Of course I think gameplay is equally important. FFVIII had pretty poor gameplay with it's draw system (IMHO) and made it less enjoyable than it could have been. Personally, I'd weight gameplay and story as being equally important, but of course as you all know now I'm biased since I'm a story nut. [smile]

Quote:

Original post by Ketchaval Tying in with Wavinator's thoughts on genre (ie. multigenre games), I've noticed that one of the "problems" with the game buying audience is that they don't seem to be as interested in the writing (ie. word-building / character building as seen in character lines, voice acting, character design, level design, level design, plot, story and themes). As they are in the gameplay.

Well, this might be because good writing is seamless integration of action, plot and character, and practically invisible to anybody in the audience except when it is represented by engaged and immersed audience members participating in an interpretational experience. That is not that far from interactive experience, which is why story driven games survive and thrive in the 'illusion of interactivity'.

Most game writing stinks, and doesn't come up to this level because it's not given it's due, so I believe the better game writing becomes (and there are notable exceptions, but let's not forget that good writing is information architecture at almost it's apex, and a good information architecture translates into a seamless and good experience by the user, whether linear or interactive in the interpretation and interface) the less this issue of interest will even exist.

Quote:

If someone says that the world has fantastic characters, level design and general quality, but that the gameplay is only average I don't think that it will interest someone (at the moment) as much as a game with fantastic gameplay but only average writing. Sad but true.

I agree. But I would add that if you are thinking in terms of gameplay experience as you write, something harder to do that just writing alone, this interest variance will fall into the BG.

Quote:

Why is this? It is partly because gameplay is what you do, and people rely on 'fresh' gameplay to keep the experience new, and obviously if the gameplay is really bad then it is going to be a hassle and tedious to play to get to the quality. Its like having a pretty frame round a dull painting.

I couldn't have described it better. It is like a pretty frame around a dull painting. Good painting is tough. Interactive painting is well, like asking a writer like me to learn how to be a master graphic designer in Photoshop and 3DSMAX, if I knew it was where my talents were going, and it was what I was born to do, I'd master it. But, alas, most game writers are programmers, who love to program and not to write, and all the examples they have of good writing were the things they learned in down time TV, or required reading in electives classes as CS/CE school. This is despite the fact countless design books scream to learn architecture, art, literature -- all kinds of things to evolve your perceptual rendering skills and interpretation skills to make you a better game designer.

I believe the balance lies in the old screenwriting plotting system of highs and lows.

You can get a player highly engaged, involved, participating on every mental cylinder in a complex interactive environment or challenge design, and they love what they just accomplished, but the mind needs a pause or a break or rest period after high levels of activity, and this is where story can help with: character dimensionalization, backstory narrative in duologue -- all kinds of ways to present information, and often this used to be the territory of the cutscene, though a lot of ppl just used it as a transitional devices or a closure for the purposes of advancement device. It's kind've like a competitive tennis player going to the wall to volley against himself or herself after a five hour sophisticated comprehensive game training day. Sometimes you like to just hit the ball around after having figured out how to beat competitors strategically for several hours.

Quote:

However, this may be partially a function of age. As players get older they may become accustomed to the tricks that level designers pull off to keep things new, and start to be more interested in the rest of the experience. Personally, I know that I've been looking for more games where the quality of the characters/world-design/etc pulls me in.

I think it is part that and I think it is also part that 'the tricks of the designers' is not as good a skillset for game design as it used to be, not that it can't be used just about anywhere anytime to keep the show on, and many people are making a paycheck today doing just that, and, 'the rest of the experience' is where game design is going into the future. You have to see the audience to understand this. It used to be a core market. Then it was a hard core/soft core audience. Now, all bets are off, and everybody, read: everybody since the dawn of time who is able, simply wants to play, and that is the responsibility our industry now has: to create the rest of the experience for the rest of the planet. Tricks of the trade are in jeopardy, but will never be out of the running. They're too reliable because of the reflex response they evoke. It's a comfortable feeling they evoke. Comfort food of the mind. What the rest of the experience is, is the rest of the menu for the mind. A rounded diet, if you will. Or, in multigenre games, more to your point, a smorgasbord.

Quote:

Obviously the best of all worlds is to have both top quality gameplay AND excellent "writing" (in all senses of the word.).

Here, I have to say, excellent game writing is top quality gameplay. You may find technical differences, yes, but when it comes to what we are in business for, it is the smiles, the wows and the bottom line aspects of the breathless, "That was fun!" At the level of the player, a degree of merge has occured. A skillful game writer knows when to construct a challenge device of complexity and pace that immediately translates into advancement of plot, bringing maximum entertainment experience to the audience/interactor. The writer and the analyst and the critic may see the subtleties, but the audience, the audience is jumping up and down in their seat, and that is where you want them to be.

Quote:

Note:Genre in games is (at least) two-fold, there is the genre of gameplay and the genre of the setting and plot.

Call me a classicist, but genre means "a style" so there is the: mystery genre, the sci fi genre, the horror genre, the FPS genre, the RPG genre, and nothing more need be, or should be read into that. Setting and plot are elements, and functional elements of story. You can construct a plot, and technically have a story, but functionalizing the timing of the pace, the characterizations and their depths or weaknesses, detailing and periodicit of the setting and dropping that again into circumstance is what makes a story. Plot is not sufficient alone for describing the class story. Plot is a member of class story, as is setting, character, pace, timing, circumstance, conflict, and so on.

Quote:

EDIT: This isn't to say that quality "writing" is bad, it helps to immerse the player in the world, and drive them on, indeed I doubt that Half-Life would have been as popular if it didn't have the whole "just another day at work" beginning with the interactive microwaves, the "buy you a beer after work", and the likeable? scientists / barneys. If it had been a simpler presentation of the story (ie. you are a space-marine Strogg are attacking), I doubt it would have been as influential. I welcome better writing / character-building / world-building. Another issue is that of, yeah I can see the story.. but WHAT do I actually do in this game? Ie. A matter of communicating the structure (substance?) of the experience.

Again, I want to stress that separation of story and play is not an absolute. You can write very interactive like, challenge designed levels as part of an overall story, and probably the reverse. This is what my game is all about, and it ain't easy, and I've been writing a long time. It is also true that true interactivity does not require a story because authorial control is surrendered to the player, and the game designer or game writer simply sets the stage and the costumes and props for the most part. Star Wars Galaxies is a great example of this. So, absolutism needs a tip of the hat for acknowledgement. The matter of communicating the structure and substance of the gameplay experience is in the setting that serves the plot that serves the story in a story driven game, and in a non-story game, the setting is a function of the gameverse being offered for a playpen of surrendered authorial effort. But, like the guy from MIT media labs said at GDC, interactivity is boring to most humans, we like, want and need to be entertained, and that is what writers are for.

Adventuredesign

I would have to disagree with most of the posts here - I enjoy the cutscences. I guess I am not a huge fan of the actual gameplay itself, but I see the gameplay as a means to get from cutscence to cutscence. Now, if the cutsenceces arent good the whole system breaks down, but I dont have much free time so I only play the cream of the crop (jade empire, kotor, etc.).

I feel the problem with games is they dont evoke an emoitional response from the player. If the player dosent care about the death of a main character, or the destruction of a world, then the cutscences dont matter. The industry has a total focus on making the best graphics possible and this is what defines a game. Hopefully in the next 10-20 years the limit on graphics will peak out, and the emphsis will be on story and gameplay.

I find it somewhat ironic that it seems to be the other way round in Asia where the game market built up from classic RPGs where writing was the most important part. Ok, I probably can't back that up, but most of my Taiwanese friends who have been avid games for long time don't really give much of a damn about fancy graphics and cool gameplay. The gameplay just needs to be average and interesting enough to complement the actual story. So, I guess since there's this difference in audience taste, there's an inherent difference in what drives the industry in different parts of the world.

From what I see around me, most americans are more tuned into the high action, FPS games that present instant gratification. While most of my asian friends that have longer gaming histories live on classic RPG franchises and somewhat despise and avoid FPSs.

So, I personally think that the statement that "People like gameplay, not 'writing'." may actually be more of a culture thing than a general global trend.

The markets and players are just different. Here in the states, we have FPSs and action games that come a dime a dozen. In Japan, you have RPGs, SRPGs, and dating sims that are a dime a dozen. They actually produce enough RPG related games that they have entire monthly magazines dedicated to it......or was that the bi-weekly H-game magazine... I forget. :p

For me, I'm a sucker for a good story. I finish RPGs to know what happens next, the game play is secondary. Best recent example, I finish Suikoden4, which had probably the worst gameplay in an RPG that I've ever seen, just to see how the story ends... The .hack series is another one that I'm forcing myself to finish just to see the conclusion of the story.

Have any of you played Anachronox at all? That is a good example of a game with excellent writing, and it's a shame it didn't do better - the reason is probably that it was somewhat behind in the graphical department by the time of its release.

Still, the point is that it was a very enjoyable experience to play this game, mainly because of the writing, because the mechanics of gameplay were not in themselves that interesting. Sometimes a player doesn't want to have to master challenging gameplay, because it can get tedious. I often get to the point with some games where I say to myself "I really can't be bothered to retry this bit 99 times to complete it, what's the point?". Others enjoy this sort of challenge, but to me it's just boring, because it turns entertainment into a chore more often than not.

Writing does offset simple gameplay as long as it's done well. I suppose that's the trouble - because it's not a widely posessed skill in the game industry, writing gets sidelined by the gameplay experience - or maybe there is no story at all, as in UT2004, say. Where many gamers just want a fun multiplayer combat experience, there's no point.

Maybe the widening audience for games will favour writing, because I think there are a lot of potential gamers who would love a good interactive experience without having to learn involved gameplay techniques.

I Disagree.

Most players wont go to their friends and say "OH MAn1!! The level design was great and the characters were so real! Oh, and the cutscenes really tied up the story and made it all seem to make sense! The gameplay was bad, but who cares! The Level design was amazing!!"


I mean, gameplay is number 1. At least in my opinion. However, all those extra details in the world is what makes the game feel less like a game. We play video games to explore another realm of exsistance where we're demon hunters, dragon slayers, and rebel outcasts.

The player may or may not conciously notice the details in the level design, or the details in the main character's personality and depth. However, on a subconsious level, all those things help fool the players brain into beleiving your game's world really does exsist somewhere.

So yeah. The player may not think they care about it all, but they do.

actually, i like writing. a good story keeps me interested in the game. honestly i'll always enjoy playing SFII before DoA2/3. one because the gameplay mechanics are great and for the most part fluid. also at least when you beat the game you have a little story describing what happens with your character. with DoA you don't have (IMO, only) fluid gameplay (jerky Tekken to me) and the end stories make no damn sense at all.

for a game that has WAAAAAAY too much story just look for The Bouncer for PS2... uggh

I don't look for good writing so much. I am more interested in a good premise for the gameplay. Like scientists on Mars open a portal to Hell, or you are James Bond, or all the Nintendo characters in a fighting game.