Story-telling of games like BioShock, Half-Life, Dead Space is still underrated

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]How the hell so?Inconsistancy

Traditional story telling is perfectly valid in many games.

---

"One feels the struggle that..."

You really come off as one smug piece of sh*t.

Why does everyone throw around the word pretentious so often?

Don't you think you're a bit pretentious using it unnecessarily?

[QUOTE="Pikminmaniac"]

I think Metroid Prime is perhaps the highest form of video game story telling. The entire story is told through the landscape. No speaking and no cutscenes. Just you and the game. You can either just play through it or stop, look around, and scan the environment to discover what is going on. YOU are the one who has to piece together the story, it isn't shoved in front of you. The story is optional, but it's there for you to discoverSciFiRPGfan

[QUOTE="Lox_Cropek"]

DraugenCP

That pic is such bullcrap. Designing a shooter like in the old days (find key, open door) would really make the game feel ancient.

You mean like Metroid Prime right? You might very loosely call it a "story." I wouldn't call it one at all. Background information is not storytelling. Creating levels for the player to adventure through is not "storytelling." There is no narrative.

I'm not a fan of LOTR, but somewhere in the books is some sort of epilogue that chronicles different bits and pieces about the world etc. Instead of reading the books, you could just read that for a similar effect. I, personally, don't think it counts. Background information is background information, but without any narrative built off of it it's not a story, it's a disorganized mess of ideas.

This gen I liked Catherines story telling the best. Seriously had me on the edge of my seat the whole time through.

I love story-based video games BioShock and Half-Life being two of the best. One reason I'm giving MGS IV a second chance.R3FURBISHED

[QUOTE="R3FURBISHED"]I love story-based video games BioShock and Half-Life being two of the best. One reason I'm giving MGS IV a second chance.Chico_L

Bioshock is probably the best story game I played this gen, but I agree it's still underrated. HaloPimp978

----------

anyways something i noticed. In a book, graphic novel, the person reading the book fixes the rate at which they read the book but how the book unfolds (don't bring up the choose-your-own-tale stories) is fixed. What is written down is written down. the reader can interpret whatever the text says but that's about it. a film the director sets the tone and pace of the film, where the audience watches back passively.

the crux for games is that games are interactive in and of themselves, they can change the pace of the game by playing better or take their time. The content of how the story tells itself can also be changed as well given the nature of being interactive.

Whenever i hear people complain about the 'exposition bot' or the 'cut scenes' i think of the '@sshole'. I don't mean the people saying they hate these things are actually @ssholes, by that word i mean is this.

in a book, movie, graphic novel, theater, or show if two characters are talking they are usually giving each other their fixed attention in the dialog. Given the nature of video games being interactive, some people think they ought to be able to shoot the person they're having to talk to, or put their head in the toilet during the dialog. some people wanna completely skip it (if they cannot already) or just keep running and gunning without paying attention. This is what i mean by the '@sshole'.

of all the mediums of which the viewer is essentially passive, you have the same way that characters interact with each other. Sometimes people don't wanna interact they just wanna play with the mechanics of said game.

Which reminds of what the maligned jennifer hepler said about wanting to skip gameplay for story. you could do the opposite as well. You would have to physically separate the two. essentially turning say a Mass Effect game into a series of non-stop cut scenes and ingame dialog scenes or into a nonstop corridor shooting gallery with enemies and occasional boss fights. the story would provide context but no action, and the action scenes would provide no context at all, you wouldn't know who the characters are, nor would you care.

Not every game can be like Mario, or Shadow of the Colossus. which by the way all of them have some sort of cut scene in them be it to bookend the game or be it ingame.

Not all of them can rely simply on their atmosphere and setting alone to not only set the tone of the world but also tell the story of it.

A game like say Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect and Bioshock require some sort of dialog between characters and in order for that to get across. It requires restraining the player to get their attention. Basically saying "quit acting squirrely and listen for a moment". and these are games that want to TELL a story.

Which brings me to another thought. you know how gamers complain about being treated like idiots because the game barks at you what to do every few minutes, or has to literally lead you by the nose from objective to objective. I think those things exist - to an extent- BECAUSE people can't be bothered to stop and listen to what NPC's are telling you.

I don't think given the nature of games that you will ever be able to satisfy everyone. If all you want is pure gameplay with little to no story, or a game that relies almost completely on it's atmosphere to tell that story then you already know what games to look for. Games like Limbo, Braid, Mario, Shadow of the Colossus (though there is A LOT going on with Braid and Shadow). if you want story most games try to put an explicitly told story in them, some execute it well some do not. some games have great stories, some do not.

[QUOTE="HaloPimp978"]Bioshock is probably the best story game I played this gen, but I agree it's still underrated. SaudiFury

----------

anyways something i noticed. In a book, graphic novel, the person reading the book fixes the rate at which they read the book but how the book unfolds (don't bring up the choose-your-own-tale stories) is fixed. What is written down is written down. the reader can interpret whatever the text says but that's about it. a film the director sets the tone and pace of the film, where the audience watches back passively.

the crux for games is that games are interactive in and of themselves, they can change the pace of the game by playing better or take their time. The content of how the story tells itself can also be changed as well given the nature of being interactive.

Whenever i hear people complain about the 'exposition bot' or the 'cut scenes' i think of the '@sshole'. I don't mean the people saying they hate these things are actually @ssholes, by that word i mean is this.

in a book, movie, graphic novel, theater, or show if two characters are talking they are usually giving each other their fixed attention in the dialog. Given the nature of video games being interactive, some people think they ought to be able to shoot the person they're having to talk to, or put their head in the toilet during the dialog. some people wanna completely skip it (if they cannot already) or just keep running and gunning without paying attention. This is what i mean by the '@sshole'.

of all the mediums of which the viewer is essentially passive, you have the same way that characters interact with each other. Sometimes people don't wanna interact they just wanna play with the mechanics of said game.

Which reminds of what the maligned jennifer hepler said about wanting to skip gameplay for story. you could do the opposite as well. You would have to physically separate the two. essentially turning say a Mass Effect game into a series of non-stop cut scenes and ingame dialog scenes or into a nonstop corridor shooting gallery with enemies and occasional boss fights. the story would provide context but no action, and the action scenes would provide no context at all, you wouldn't know who the characters are, nor would you care.

Not every game can be like Mario, or Shadow of the Colossus. which by the way all of them have some sort of cut scene in them be it to bookend the game or be it ingame.

Not all of them can rely simply on their atmosphere and setting alone to not only set the tone of the world but also tell the story of it.

A game like say Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect and Bioshock require some sort of dialog between characters and in order for that to get across. It requires restraining the player to get their attention. Basically saying "quit acting squirrely and listen for a moment". and these are games that want to TELL a story.

Which brings me to another thought. you know how gamers complain about being treated like idiots because the game barks at you what to do every few minutes, or has to literally lead you by the nose from objective to objective. I think those things exist - to an extent- BECAUSE people can't be bothered to stop and listen to what NPC's are telling you.

I don't think given the nature of games that you will ever be able to satisfy everyone. If all you want is pure gameplay with little to no story, or a game that relies almost completely on it's atmosphere to tell that story then you already know what games to look for. Games like Limbo, Braid, Mario, Shadow of the Colossus (though there is A LOT going on with Braid and Shadow). if you want story most games try to put an explicitly told story in them, some execute it well some do not. some games have great stories, some do not.

To be honest those games you listed don't even really have very good stories, they are just presented well, tricking people into thinking otherwise.

I don't care how a story is presented, Ill sit through a bunch of text bubbles with a bunch of polygons standing around in a circle on the screen, a good story is a good story.. Too many developers have got this weird facination with interactive cutscenes and all this other BS. It doesn't make your story any better. If you want to tell one, then do it. Great. Otherwise you are just slowing down the game and taking away from the gameplay and other things that they should be focusing on.

[QUOTE="HaloPimp978"]Bioshock is probably the best story game I played this gen, but I agree it's still underrated. SaudiFury

----------

anyways something i noticed. In a book, graphic novel, the person reading the book fixes the rate at which they read the book but how the book unfolds (don't bring up the choose-your-own-tale stories) is fixed. What is written down is written down. the reader can interpret whatever the text says but that's about it. a film the director sets the tone and pace of the film, where the audience watches back passively.

the crux for games is that games are interactive in and of themselves, they can change the pace of the game by playing better or take their time. The content of how the story tells itself can also be changed as well given the nature of being interactive.

Whenever i hear people complain about the 'exposition bot' or the 'cut scenes' i think of the '@sshole'. I don't mean the people saying they hate these things are actually @ssholes, by that word i mean is this.

in a book, movie, graphic novel, theater, or show if two characters are talking they are usually giving each other their fixed attention in the dialog. Given the nature of video games being interactive, some people think they ought to be able to shoot the person they're having to talk to, or put their head in the toilet during the dialog. some people wanna completely skip it (if they cannot already) or just keep running and gunning without paying attention. This is what i mean by the '@sshole'.

of all the mediums of which the viewer is essentially passive, you have the same way that characters interact with each other. Sometimes people don't wanna interact they just wanna play with the mechanics of said game.

Which reminds of what the maligned jennifer hepler said about wanting to skip gameplay for story. you could do the opposite as well. You would have to physically separate the two. essentially turning say a Mass Effect game into a series of non-stop cut scenes and ingame dialog scenes or into a nonstop corridor shooting gallery with enemies and occasional boss fights. the story would provide context but no action, and the action scenes would provide no context at all, you wouldn't know who the characters are, nor would you care.

Not every game can be like Mario, or Shadow of the Colossus. which by the way all of them have some sort of cut scene in them be it to bookend the game or be it ingame.

Not all of them can rely simply on their atmosphere and setting alone to not only set the tone of the world but also tell the story of it.

A game like say Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect and Bioshock require some sort of dialog between characters and in order for that to get across. It requires restraining the player to get their attention. Basically saying "quit acting squirrely and listen for a moment". and these are games that want to TELL a story.

Which brings me to another thought. you know how gamers complain about being treated like idiots because the game barks at you what to do every few minutes, or has to literally lead you by the nose from objective to objective. I think those things exist - to an extent- BECAUSE people can't be bothered to stop and listen to what NPC's are telling you.

I don't think given the nature of games that you will ever be able to satisfy everyone. If all you want is pure gameplay with little to no story, or a game that relies almost completely on it's atmosphere to tell that story then you already know what games to look for. Games like Limbo, Braid, Mario, Shadow of the Colossus (though there is A LOT going on with Braid and Shadow). if you want story most games try to put an explicitly told story in them, some execute it well some do not. some games have great stories, some do not.

Very good post, especially the point about context and action.

Story telling is an example of everything wrong with modern gaming.

TheFallenDemon

Story telling is an example of everything wrong with modern gaming.

TheFallenDemon

Now, I know why Bethesda make games like these... tsk, tsk, tsk

Dead Space's storytelling was just decent to me. It did it's job well, but didn't stand out. As for Bioshock, I think that game is already regarded as having one of the best stories this gen and one of the best plot twist in gaming. It seems like it gets its due praise imo.

One Year old.

Halflife began them all. It was Halflife, not System Shock that revolutionized scripted story-telling. Halflife done it masterfully as well. Most titles these days, do not. They use gameplay merely to facilitate the cinematic scripted sequences rather than the other way around, the way it should be,

People saying "oh ah, Call of Duty" "oh ah Last Of us". Noobs.

System Shock truly was the greatest pioneer and the biggest inovator when it comes to first person games,still to this day most games that have similar gameplay styles all use most of it´s tropes,it truly was way ahead of it´s time when it came out in 1994,though in some ways,Ultima Underworld was the one that started it all in 1992.

They make me cry.

Still Open ? Mods must be asleep.

Quickly Everybody, Nows your chance to mis behave ! Lets **** this place up ! :p

I agree with you about these games having a better method for storytelling than most, but there is a series that goes a step further and it's called Metroid Prime. There is a story in the game, but it is entirely up to you to discover and piece together. With the above games, there's still a lot of times where the game stops itself to deliver dialogue or exposition. Sure you can still move, but in a very limited way during these portions.

I still think Metroid Prime is the ultimate in using the video game medium's story telling capabilities in the most video game centric way. It's all player initiated.

@ Pikminmaniac

A Man after my own Heart ! :D

System Shock never stops you or limits you in any way,and pretty much all the exposition is optional(and that was in 1994),SS2 has a couple of moments that it actually kind of stops you but that´s it.

Also another one would be Ultima Underworld,same as the first SS,completely free to explore and nothing gets in your way ever(not in the sense you mean that is),in fact,even less so than MP,because Metroid gates you from getting to certain areas while Ultima Underworld doesn´t.

Those are even more "player initiated" than the MP games.

I have no doubt that hose games could do what Metroid Prime does, but better. I just don't game on PC

But Metroid Prime is an excellent game nonetheless but damn that last boss was a bitch.

It's sunday... this is normal on sundays i believe. Mods have a life too :P

I actually recognize that map. It's from DOOM1.

Well you should then,and the games I mentioned are old enough that anyone can run them,you shouldn´t miss on tons of timeless classics just because you don´t want to play on a specific platform,especially one such as the PC wich has the biggest ammount of classics of any platform ever.

@ Joedgabe

Nice to know theres a Deadzone/Blindspot in between shifts. Hehe.

Mods are unique people, they don't even get paid.

@shahankur3112: Do not bump old threads.