Legacy of the Void

[Articorse]

You make a good point, Turalyon. I think I touched on that in one of my posts, though I might've missed it. Games are difficult to judge as a medium, because they're too new and take much longer/many more people to make than, say, books. We don't really know what they're really capable of yet.

[TheEconomist]

Your claim was that those stories would've been better had they been put in another medium.

Well jeez Arty, if you had told me all of this sooner I could've altered my argument to reflect that. All of this mess could have been avoided.

because it's the youngest medium compared to movies and books

Except game stories were better years ago and the improvements that are being made are in the storytelling department, which has nothing to do with what I'm saying. Remember the discussion I was continuing was in regards to plot holes and inconsistencies in the StarCraft story, which were obviously made for game play related reasons. I simply pointed out that games are more prone to this than other mediums and was somehow deemed a games hater and heretic. As if my being here doesn't single handedly defeat any such allegations.

I think TheEconomist and Articorse are a little too hardcore for me.

Do not confuse what I have actually said with what Arty has said I said. Especially since your stance was bit more extreme than mine since I never made the argument that games are a worse medium because they are harder to do.

[mr. peasant]

Do not confuse what I have actually said with what Arty has said I said. Especially since your stance was bit more extreme than mine since I never made the argument that games are a worse medium because they are harder to do.

The jab I was making was how the two of you manage to go round after round for so long. Me, I'd have tapped out long ago. Don't have the attention span or stamina anymore.

[Turalyon]

Except game stories were better years ago and the improvements that are being made are in the storytelling department, which has nothing to do with what I'm saying. Remember the discussion I was continuing was in regards to plot holes and inconsistencies in the StarCraft story, which were obviously made for game play related reasons. I simply pointed out that games are more prone to this than other mediums and was somehow deemed a games hater and heretic.

I wasn't responding to any one in particular. Just making a general side comment on the matter.

It's interesting to note why you say game stories were better years ago. Is it because back in the day they couldn't shore up the gameplay and had to focus on the story to overcome shortcomings in the technology and game design back then? Is part of the reason why more modern day games have seemingly more sucky stories due to their inherent focus on improved technology, game design and various gameplay mechanics during development? Will we see a plateau in modern game design improvement thereby allowing better stories to be made and integrated with it? The thing with all those questions is that the "game play related reasons" can be an impetus for both (perceptually) good and bad stories to come out. Maybe as the medium matures more we may see an upswing in good stories. Right now we can't see it because the medium is, in part, still relatively young and constantly changing.

I do agree with the general sentiment that games are more prone to have bad storytelling, though.

[Quirel]

I wasn't responding to any one in particular. Just making a general side comment on the matter.

It's interesting to note why you say game stories were better years ago. Is it because back in the day they couldn't shore up the gameplay and had to focus on the story to overcome shortcomings in the technology and game design back then? Is part of the reason why more modern day games have seemingly more sucky stories due to their inherent focus on improved technology, game design and various gameplay mechanics during development?

Actually, the answer is simple. Go through dev interviews and count how many times you hear a variation of the phrase "We wanted a more cinematic experience."

The problem is that, now that they have countless polygons to work with, the artists and writers are imitating Hollywood and its brand of storytelling. Unfortunately, games and movies ARE different beasts, and the storytelling of one doesn't carry over to the other.
Take, for example, the interrogation scene in The Dark Knight. That scene works because of camera angles and timing, not just because of the dialog. A game version would be mostly cutscene (Ala ME2) and involve dialog trees and QTEs. To be honest, while Mass Effect's cutscenes are great examples of storytelling, they're not Mass Effects best instances of gameplay.

Then there's the recent trend toward 'great setpieces'. You know, having beautiful surroundings that you can't interact with, while the areas you do fight through are boring, drab, etc. Call of Duty and Halo 4 are huge offenders here. Hey, all these spires and the massive installation on the ground far below look great. Pity that flying a Pelican from point A to point B, C, and D is as engaging as watching C-SPAN in slow motion. These Forerunner interiors look awesome... no, wait, they don't. They're visually cluttered and you can't tell one platform from another. But hey, lens flare makes everything better, right?

Finally, there's QTEs. While they can be used to great effect (Mass Effect 2), they're all too often used to replace gameplay because "Nothing you could possibly do can be as awesome as what our cutscene director thought of."

[mr. peasant]

All this talk about storytelling in video games remind me of the first episode of Extra Credits - Bad Writing. The video, written and presented by video game industry insiders, describe the issues surrounding bad writing in video games and why they occur. As pointed out in the video, video game development typically starts from the technological or marketing side of things, rather than the storytelling side. In addition, writers are rarely ever brought in from the very beginning of the project but mid-way through the process once the programmers have completed the rough groundwork for the game; and are consequently constrained by the game mechanics and decisions that were made prior to the writer's involvement.

Sure, video games do have storytelling tools that no other medium has. However, for most other mediums, the story or script is the real first concrete component that is completed more often than not. Sure, movies are often times constrained by budgets and other resources. However, it's not like the studios have already hired the engineers and technicians prior to the scriptwriter's first draft that gives a rough outline exactly what expertise, locations and other assets are needed. With video games, the programming team is already in place, some assets already produced and the core mechanics largely ingrained. If any of these things aren't ideal, it's more often the writer who has to improvise and compromise. With movies, it's generally the other way around with the cinematographers and effects teams having to do the bulk of the adapting should any mismatch arise.

[TheEconomist]

Oh wow, I could've skipped the walls of text and just posted a link.

[Turalyon]

Go through dev interviews and count how many times you hear a variation of the phrase "We wanted a more cinematic experience."

To me, this philosophy seems to be most prevalent only in the more modern day "bigger" titles or shooter (or rather those that are overtly violent primarily) type games. The "bigger" titles these days need to justify their status by including things other than what the game is about. Also we have to consider that a game aping a "cinematic experience" is to try and capitalise on the status and strength of cinema/film in storytelling that it has only cultivated over many years. Not only is this emulation the sincerest form of flattery but it is also the easiest way to give it an (artificial) sense of nous.

It becomes very obvious when we look at the majority of shooters. Although I don't play shooters (and the possibility that I'm talking out of my arse as a result), I find that such a gameplay mechanic is very limited, repetitive and not very conducive to weaving a story around it. As such, they are more prone to having this "cinematic experience" treatment placed upon them.

All this talk about storytelling in video games remind me of the first episode of Extra Credits - Bad Writing.

If any of these things aren't ideal, it's more often the writer who has to improvise and compromise.

I love Extra Credits!

As I mentioned before, the limitations that the game imposes on the writer can be an impetus for "better" stories even though in most cases these days it's usually "crappy" stories. Afterall, isn't this the reason some people use to explain why the stories of older games are better than more modern games? It's not all nostalgia that makes people think that way either.

[Articorse]

The whole argument was apparently brought on by the wording that TheEconomist used. When I hear that something is 'bad', I assume the person saying it is implying there's something that could do the job 'well'. When you take that into account, the sentence 'Video games are possibly the worst medium for a serious, thought-provoking story', I parse that as 'Any other medium would do a better job at telling any given video game story'. That's what the word 'bad' means.

What you're apparently trying to say is that people face obstacles, which prevent them from using video games as a medium to their full potential. That, at least in my mind, cannot be phrased as 'video games are a bad medium for telling stories', but as 'video games are difficult to use and very often misused as a medium'.

I agree that games are more often than not misused when we're talking about telling a story. Most games tell their stories badly or have bad stories to begin with. I don't contest that point. I contest the point that video games are an inherently bad medium for telling stories.

And I believe the Extra Credits video defends both of our points.

[mr. peasant]

I love Extra Credits!

As I mentioned before, the limitations that the game imposes on the writer can be an impetus for "better" stories even though in most cases these days it's usually "crappy" stories. Afterall, isn't this the reason some people use to explain why the stories of older games are better than more modern games? It's not all nostalgia that makes people think that way either.

I think it helped that older games tended to tell simpler stories. I mean, look at Mario. While not an amazingly complex story, it's told fairly competently. Fairly early on, it's established that he's trying to rescue the Princess. And although nearly no text is given (except "The Princess is in another castle"), the changing level themes show Mario is doggedly searching far and wide for wherever King Koopa is hiding her. It's easy to convey because what's trying to be communicated to the player isn't all that complex to begin with.

And with games that are a little more plot and narrative heavy, much of the story is told through text. As such, much of the experience and tools from writing novels and other text-based mediums could be applied to the game. Meanwhile, such methods of storytelling are now deemed unacceptable in video games nowadays. A good example would be to compare Warcraft II and Warcraft III.

As a new industry, there are constantly BIG changes in methodologies and new developments that video game story writers have to constantly keep abreast of. Lessons learned and techniques mastered in telling a story in one game may no longer be applicable when said writer works on another game a few years down the line. This is less so for other mediums where things have more or less "stabilised" with changes done at a much slower pace or there would only be one big innovation to learn around (e.g. colour TV, 3D, etc). It is, of course, not helped that the industry as a whole, unlike novels and movies, is not centred around storytelling but game mechanics; as can be seen in the indie game industry which often centre around innovative game mechanics rather than stories.