|
Post by kyouki on Nov 21, 2006 14:27:09 GMT -5
Yeah, the horror genre pretty much relies on atmosphere to carry the games. Silent Hill 2 is awful from a gameplay perspective, but thanks to the atmosphere it's one of my favorite games.
No one asked me, but story/plot is not important at all to me in games. I can see if you really love RPGs that a good plot could help you to look past dull/mediocre gameplay. I remember quite clearly playing through Final Fantasy 2 SNES for the first time, and the plot was what was really getting me through the game. But looking back on it the story is really weak. When I got the GBA remake of the game I couldn't bring myself to play it I was so bored with it.
Furthermore there are very few RPGs I can play now. Back in the NES/SNES days RPGs were my favorite genre. Now, not so much. The only RPGs I can enjoy now have to offer a lot more than a good story. Romancing Saga, King's Field, Metal Saga, and to an extent Final Fantasy XII offer a lot of freedom and choice in playing the game, and I can appreciate that.
I don't think I've been impressed with the plot in a video game since Silent Hill 2. Silent Hill 2 has a good story. But then I have to add "for a video game." If I am watching someone playing SH2 it's boring as hell. A lot of the reason the story is "good" is because you are able to look past the awful dialog and script because you are controlling the main character and thus are experiencing the game sort of in the first person. The Silent Hill movie was a perfect adaptation of Silent Hill to the big screen. Watching this you really appreciate how much of the experience is... well... actually experiencing the game rather than watching it. I dunno, I don't think very many games (if any) even approach the pulpiest of pulp writing, never mind something really good.
|
|
|
Post by necromaniac on Nov 21, 2006 14:40:50 GMT -5
Planescape: Torment KOTOR II (kinda), Deus Ex, Killer7, Baldur's Gate, Resident Evil series, Silent Hill series, Point 'n Click adventure games, Vampire: Bloodlines, Clive Barker's Undying, Shin Megami Tensei, Alpha Centauri etc. Games don't need great storylines to be fun but saying there aren't any is kind of ignorant.
|
|
|
Post by MRSKELETON on Nov 21, 2006 16:02:22 GMT -5
I dont think it's a gimmick, But I must express my disconent over action games If you intentionally have a good soundtrack, We would like to hear our action and not
YAH HAH YEAH HAH HAAA UORYA UORYA SLAM DUNK COME HERE SLAM DUNK HAH YEAH SLAM DUNK
|
|
|
Post by jameseightbitstar on Nov 21, 2006 18:16:24 GMT -5
Like Kyouki, I got bored of RPGs for awhile too. So I deprived myself of them for like a month. When I put one in, suddenly they were fun again. So... if you ever find yourself bored of a genre, then simply don't play it.
Now, thing is, I tend to think that RPGs require just as much gameplay as any other genre. I mean sure, someone who is experienced with RPGs will be like "Why? You can win any RPG by blahblahblah" but thing is... it's experts saying this. I mean, an expert at Action Games might very well tell you that beating Shinobi is all a matter of doing this or that at the right time, but to a newbie who hasn't played millions of times and doesn't have the levels freaking memorized, it's tough going. Same goes for RPGs--you may know the ins and outs of all the commands and spells but someone who just played RPGs for the first time sure doesn't.
But yeah, RPGs need gameplay, and it only takes a little thought to see it. I didn't spend an hour on the Veldt having Gau learn new rages because I thought it would enhance the storyline, I did it because I thought it would make Gau a more versatile fighter later in the game. The part where you have to defend the Esper from Kefka on the mountain is another example--in that battle I severely felt that my characters were under-powered (I had foregone getting weapon and armor upgrades during Sabin's scenario because I thought I would get better ones before the battle) and was like "OMG there's no way I'm going to win this." That's tension, and good tension comes from good gameplay. RPGs can and should be challenging too, and again the above-mentioned example is a good show of that: There were times when some of my groups were on the verge of dying.
Of course, you can nix the challenge by levelling up during the Lete River sequence. Some people use this to maintain that RPGs don't really have Gameplay, but then, this kind of thing is no different from a Metroid player who hunts down all the upgrades before facing the bosses, or a Ninja Gaiden player who makes sure to have the best weapon before advancing further in the level. It in all honesty it really proves my point about RPGs having Gameplay, because this means you actually have a choice about how you're going to approach the game, and choices = gameplay, period.
So what brought on this ramble here? Simple, I was planning to use it to answer Shido's question of "what is my beef with storylines?" Quite frankly, my beef with them is:
1. Gamers, especially RPG Players, seem to worship the blasted things. I've honestly met people who have cussed me out or flamed me for saying RPGs can ever have qualities besides storyline or that telling a good story is not the single focus of the RPG. It's like arguing with a Christian about why Noah's Ark couldn't possibly be a true story.
2. Game designers have started using "storyline" as a sort of cop-out to make the actual gameplay of RPGs more and more lame. I mean, just look at Final Fantasy X--that game was basically an interactive movie. Maybe if I wanted to hear a story, I would play it... but frankly, I could care less about the godforsaken story. I want a fun game, and watching cutscenes that are the length of an episode of X-Files is not my idea of "fun."
3. Frankly, RPGs have very low standards of "good story." Sure, some introduce a good mystery or an interesting concept, but after you've played a hundred of them the plotlines tend to get a little predictable, and almost all of them depend largely on coincidences and huge suspensions of disbelief to work. When I was eighteen, I thoght Xenogears was one of the best storylines I had ever seen in an RPG. Granted, it may still be, but that wouldn't be saying a lot, as this time around I found myself just laughing at all the stretches of disbelief, unlikely events, and possible plotholes this game was asking me to swallow (I must admit I haven't completely replayed the game yet--I'll tackle it after I'm done replaying FF6, which has similar issues but they seem to not be as extreme).
Honestly, adventure games are a better storytelling medium than RPGs, and even those tend to have minimalist stories (Zork was just a guy running around collecting treasure, and it's still fun). the deal with RPGs is that the writers try to fit every far-fetched thing they can into the plot so gamers can pretend there's some sort of depth to it. It's sort of like Evangelion's Razor: Fanboys will think its deep. Non-Fanboys will think its hilarious.
|
|
|
Post by MRSKELETON on Nov 21, 2006 18:30:31 GMT -5
Vagrant story, legend of dragoon, Valkyrie profile, (Dark messiah of MM is an RPG technically) Are examples of RPG's with great gameplay, but that's the problem. RPG hardcores nowdays are so idiotic that if it isn't turn based it isnt' an RPG
|
|
|
Post by kyouki on Nov 21, 2006 18:36:02 GMT -5
See, in my opinion the writing in video games is so subpar as to ruin any chance of having a good plot. But I don't think games should necessarily need good writing anyway... games are after all a visual form of entertainment and as they say a picture is worth a thousand words.
The writing might be bad because it is translated from Japanese most of the time. However, I've not played a western game with good writing yet, though I tend to prefer western RPGs to Japanese RPGs for example. Heck my favorite game ever, Ultima 7, has only decent writing. If I read a book with that quality of writing in it I would be very disappointed. However, since I'm playing a game it is acceptable because the writing is a small part compared to the actual playing of the game.
In my opinion games should stop trying to emulate Hollywood and should maybe start to try looking more like comic books. I don't care for comic books myself, but the best comic artists/writers play to the strength of the medium rather than emulate movies. The best thing about games is that they are interactive, and writing honestly more often than not gets in the way of that. I'd love to see a game that attempts to tell a story with no dialog at all. A nonlinear horror game in which no one speaks for instance and you must survive using your wits. This would be an absolutely awesome experience, because it's something a horror movie or novel cannot do.
I suspect this is one reason why the SIMS games are so popular. There's no writing whatsoever and it's literally a "pure gameplay" experience... though in my case I don't care for the gameplay.
|
|
|
Post by necromaniac on Nov 21, 2006 18:36:10 GMT -5
"It's sort of like Evangelion's Razor: Fanboys will think its deep. Non-Fanboys will think its hilarious."
Wile I'm no Eva fan boy, it is deeper than you might think. Just ignore the religious mumbo-jumbo, it's just there to make it more "cool" (actual statement from one of eva's creators) and the "ZOMG! IT's REiii! comments (seriously, what's sexy about a 14 year old albino-clone-thing?). Hint, it's not about the characters. It's about one character. The dominant one that isn't even in the show/movie.
|
|
|
Post by kal on Nov 21, 2006 19:23:43 GMT -5
I don't know whether storyline and atmosphere can be considered gimmicks though (returning to the original point of the topic). I'm sitting here and I happened to look at the copy of Zombie Revenge on my desk and I thought, the game has atmosphere and the game has a storyline and it tries hard to use both of them but the thing is, they suck.
The problem with most games is that because the medium is interactive and digital (meaning that the images displayed aren't true to life) it has to try extra hard to even have a story without being to railroady..now I like storylines sometimes I think they ruin games with the Obligatory Storyline trend that runs through all the time but that's probably the closest thing I'd say to a storyline trend. In some games the plot exists to move the game along to move interactivitey and that's perfectly acceptable (ala Zombie Revenge) or they can be the guiding force and you kind of play the game inbetween (Final Fantasy X) the thing is big or small Video Games have Storylines now much like all movies do and like movies some games focus heavily on the storyline where as others simply don't but with video games there's a greater ratio of plotless/nonsensical games. Sukioden as a series wouldn't be nearly as good if the plot wasn't constantly popping up.
Atmosphere is another thing that really can't be argued as a trend (all of this is my opinion though) because every game created ever has one. Space Invaders, Pong, Space Wars..they all have one deliberate or not. Resident Evil one has one too and it's atmosphere is intrinsic to it's entire gameplay experience, like Alone in the Dark and Night of the living Dead (Film) before it, the enemies exist not just as a result of plotdevices and gameplay necessity but for the slow deliberate and inevitable march that the zombie state provides, the player feels helpless but not quite and if compared to something horrible like CountDown Vampires with its running *zombies* you can see how important the games atmosphere is (because Resident Evil would suck to play without it). Call of Duty is a favourite of mine because it does WW2 well, to bring up the old games again it's like Galaga to Space Invaders, same basic thing as a whole bunch of other titles and yet it does something differently and something that makes it arguably better. Call of Duty is one of the only times in a WW2 game where I've personally felt that my NPC teammates actually were capable of doing something and the enviroments were done up in such a way that it felt more like a proper warzone, RTCW is a great game but it never feels like a warzone.
RPGs as a genre exist in a funny void of fanboys, puriests and the rare person looking for a games that's actually fun. The funny thing is turn based RPGs are exactly that, TURN BASED if an RPG is turn based then I consider it a Turn-Based RPG..purist be damned..it'd be much like claiming the recent Dark Messiah game is anything but a RPG-FPS, if games don't fit genres you don't try and pigeon hole them, you've got to either merge different classifications together or make up a new one. Purists need to be beaten with sticks. Not a major RPG player myself (I'm actually if anything a Stat-Turnbased-RPGer myself..or FPSrpg's) I won't get into the storyline balance of an RPG vs its gameplay but I'll bring up Fire Emblem and throw it on the table, it offers you very few choices and yet manages to be highly playable AND have a good plot line.
Also to prove absolutely everything I tried to say (I think I lost the plot somewhere) System Shock 2 is the absolutely most awesome game ever in terms of balance between everything, Superb atmosphere, Stat Distributation (ie RPGness), FPS gameplay and storyline if anything can prove that nothing is a gimmick it'd be that.
/end ranty thing where I may have lost the point.
|
|
|
Post by kyouki on Nov 21, 2006 20:49:02 GMT -5
System Shock and System Shock 2 are great because most of the plot is there for you to uncover. When you play the game you aren't taken out of the game and forced to watch cinema scenes. You are experiencing the plot through playing the game. So it's easy to overlook some amateurish writing or whatever. Since you are experiencing it firsthand you don't need good writing necessarily. King's Field is like this as well. There's not much plot, but what is there is decent, and it's all optional. You piece it together through playing the game. Other examples: Ultima 7 (the plot isn't optional, but there's a ton of stuff you will miss if you don't pay attention... the flipside of this is that much of the plot is optional... you can have a hell of a time playing the game as an exploration game), Romacing Saga (to an extent), and Legend of Mana (again, to an extent).
The problem I have with a lot of games is that they do not take advantage of the interactivity inherent in the medium, so you sit there and read screens of text or watch cinema scenes. So I can't help but compare that to a book or movie, respectively, and notice how games come short.
|
|
|
Post by jameseightbitstar on Nov 21, 2006 23:04:32 GMT -5
I have yet to play Ultima 7... I never beat Ultima 5, but I must say I really prefer the nonlinear nature of it over railroaded RPGs.
I mean, I'm plopped into this fantasy world (one I've been to before, so there's a degree of sentiment and familiarity) and I hear it's been taken over by this tyrant... then I learn about a resistance movement...
but this isn't FF6. The game isn't gonna take me to the resistance, I have to find it. So I look and talk to everyone and ask about "Resistance" and eventually I find it... after handing 40 GP over to a bartender.
I like games like that, because they make me feel like I'm there, like I'm personally involved. Sure, FF6 is good and it too has an evil empire plotline, but at the same time I'm just a passive observer looking at other people's decisions.
|
|
|
Post by kal on Nov 22, 2006 1:31:20 GMT -5
Agreed, though I think it's annoying when games get too cryptic about what you *should* do next, like you need to ask some obscure question relating to a dialogue you heard half the game ago and nothing else will let you move foward.
|
|
|
Post by shido on Nov 22, 2006 2:32:57 GMT -5
LOL jameseightbitstar you made me laugh Just because someone love stories in RPGs that makes him a fanboy? Right... "If they don't think like me, that's mean they are fanboys! YEAH!!!"
Maybe you just don't like epic stories... I know many people that can't conact to that kind of stories, but atleast they don't think that people that do love them are fanboys.
And yes I think gameplay is very important in RPGs, and yes better than the plot, that is why my favorite RPGs contain both awesome story and awesome gameplay like Valkyrie Profile, Final Fantasy Tactics, Suikoden 2, Chrono Cross and more.
|
|
|
Post by YourAverageJoe on Nov 22, 2006 8:57:50 GMT -5
All this reminds me of my friend who's actually convinced that FF10 is the greatest RPG ever, and that the sphere grid is somehow deep and not a frontend that actually keeps info AWAY from the player! It's nearly impossible to keep your characters balanced if you have to look at a status screen for every level you achieve, instead of the handy level number.
|
|
|
Post by jameseightbitstar on Nov 23, 2006 19:52:18 GMT -5
LOL jameseightbitstar you made me laugh Just because someone love stories in RPGs that makes him a fanboy? Right... "If they don't think like me, that's mean they are fanboys! YEAH!!!" You misunderstood me. It's not so much people loving the stories that makes them fanboys, it's loving them TOO MUCH--the intellectualism, the constant scholar-wannabe rambles about depth and integrity, and the way fans have of reading too damn much into everything. Depends on what we're calling "epic." I like a good story just fine, just that there's very few RPGs I think geniunely have one and those that do often have major faults in other areas.
|
|
|
Post by megatronbison on Nov 23, 2006 21:25:15 GMT -5
I don't have much to contribute to this but with jameseightbitstar's comment earlier I agree on a certain level: I once read a fans analysis of FF9's plot and man- he was giving that games paper thin plot a Shaksperian level. It reminded me of the time a friend once got a Burger King and stacked some emptied vinegar, tomato sauce and salt sachet's on top of each other and gave an hour long rant of how this could be a social commentary. In the end he admitted he was talking total nonsence but it went to prove in my eyes that everyone can give something far, far too much meaning. I mean childs drawings can be interpreted as genius sometimes when in fact they are simple, basic things.
|
|