244 réponses à ce sujet

[Jonathan Shepard]

Look, if I want a fun time shooting crap everywhere, I'll go play Halo or something (which I love doing after a stressful day, don't get me wrong). If want awesome story to completely lose myself in, I'll go play Mass Effect. The huge payoff of Mass Effect is that it IS a sci-fi RPG/Shooter mix. But story must come first. Or I'll stick to Halo, which, while it has a decent story, it tends to get repetitive and predictable.

[Jonathan Shepard]

wizardryforever wrote...

Look at it this way.  Say you have really bad eyesight, and you need glasses in order to read.  Now let's say the game is a book, and gameplay is your glasses.  If you have really poor glasses, you will struggle to read (ie experience) the story, and it will be difficult to get into the story given how hard it is to read it.  Now imagine you replace those glasses with a pair that lets you see with crystal clarity.  Suddenly the story (no matter its quality) seems better, because you don't have to really work to enjoy it.

Bad gameplay can hinder your experience of a game's story the same way a bad pair of glasses can hinder your experience of a book's story.  That's the way I view it.

Unless the book is so terribly written that you simply can't stand to read one more page, despite how nice the page looks. Example: Twilight.

Sorry about the double post... darnsit!

Modifié par Jonathan Shepard, 27 octobre 2010 - 12:49 .

[Haventh]

I can't choose, i want gameplay to be fun, but at the same time i want the story to be interesting, engaging and with plot twsts.

[Randy1012]

It depends on the game. If we're talking about Call of Duty or Madden NFL, then yeah, the gameplay is definitely more important. But we're talking about RPGs; more importantly, BioWare RPGs. BioWare RPGs have always been about the story and the characters first, above anything else. Jade Empire's gameplay wasn't great (but it was serviceable), but I still love it to this day because of the story, the characters, and the setting. Personally, I thought ME1's gameplay was fine, if a little choppy. Combat was a breeze for me. But, like Jade Empire, it was the great story, characters, and setting that truly set it apart.

[wizardryforever]

Jonathan Shepard wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

Look at it this way.  Say you have really bad eyesight, and you need glasses in order to read.  Now let's say the game is a book, and gameplay is your glasses.  If you have really poor glasses, you will struggle to read (ie experience) the story, and it will be difficult to get into the story given how hard it is to read it.  Now imagine you replace those glasses with a pair that lets you see with crystal clarity.  Suddenly the story (no matter its quality) seems better, because you don't have to really work to enjoy it.

Bad gameplay can hinder your experience of a game's story the same way a bad pair of glasses can hinder your experience of a book's story.  That's the way I view it.

Unless the book is so terribly written that you simply can't stand to read one more page, despite how nice the page looks. Example: Twilight.

Sorry about the double post... darnsit!

Of course.  I wasn't disputing the importance of story, only pointing out the importance of gameplay as well, which is why I voted that story is only slightly more important.

[Nightwriter]

Hmm. I'm not sure about that analogy.

To me it's more like the difference between reading something from block text on paper and having the text shown to you bullet by bullet in a colorful and eye-appealing PowerPoint slideshow presentation.

The slideshow is easier on the eyes, but the information is the same and I could read the block text just as well, it just would be less glamorous and exciting.

[wizardryforever]

Nightwriter wrote...

Hmm. I'm not sure about that analogy.

To me it's more like the difference between reading something from block text on paper and having the text shown to you bullet by bullet in a colorful and eye-appealing PowerPoint slideshow presentation.

The slideshow is easier on the eyes, but the information is the same and I could read the block text just as well, it just would be less glamorous and exciting.

I don't really think that works though.  Gameplay is not window-dressing, it's a pretty important part of any game.  It's what makes a game a game!  If you have to slog through the gameplay to get to the juicy story, it lessens the enjoyment that the story brings.  If the gameplay hinders the experience by being tedious or frustrating, then anyone is going to like the game less.  It doesn't matter if the story is the best one ever conceived, the experience is diminished by poor gameplay.  That's the point I was trying to convey with my analogy.

[Nightwriter]

But who is saying a better story will require you to "slog through" horrendous gameplay? I think it's fairly safe to say ME2's gameplay would've gotten improved no matter what. Why must some insist that story had to stay weak for the sake of that gameplay, which would've been improved anyway?

[ToshiStation38]

If Bioware can make the gameplay in ME 3 as good as it was in Lair of the Shadow Broker, it would be amazing. ME 2's gameplay was pretty good, much better than ME 1, but it compared to LotSB, it's dull. LotSB had such a good mix between the boss fights, the usual shooting parts, and the skycar sequence. The action in and out of cutscenes was simply fantastic, and in no way whatsoever did the story suffer IMO.

[wizardryforever]

Nightwriter wrote...

But who is saying a better story will require you to "slog through" horrendous gameplay?

I don't think anyone is saying that, least of all me.  As I said earlier, it would be ideal to have both be good.  For the sake of narrowing down the argument, though, it's best to argue as though they are mutually exclusive (even though they aren't).  I've seen people claim that as long as the game is fun, the story could be virtually non-existent and they wouldn't care.  I've also heard people (many more on this board) claim that the gameplay could be as bad as getting a root canal and they wouldn't care as long as they story was good.  I started this poll (and thread) to determine how many people fell into each camp, and how much variation there was between the two extremes.

I think it's fairly safe to say ME2's gameplay would've gotten improved no matter what. Why must some insist that story had to stay weak for the sake of that gameplay, which would've been improved anyway?

Sure, the gameplay would have improved regardless.  But I don't think it is safe to say that the amount of improvement would have been the same if they hadn't devoted so many resources towards improving said gameplay.  Besides, it is difficult to top the story of one's previous works sometimes.  Eventually it kind of plateaus and there are only minor variations.  Even if that's totally bogus, it isn't really all that fair to say that Bioware failed as a developer because the story was a bit weak.  I don't know who has said that the story had to be weak for the sake of gameplay, but I do believe that the huge improvement in gameplay makes up for the comparitively small drop in story quality.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Yeah if you're asking which is more important as far as every game out there is concerned, then gameplay is more important than story... some games don't even have a story.





If you're referring to which should be their focus for Mass Effect 3, then it would definitely be story because outside of a few tweaks ME2's combat is great enough to play another game in .

[wizardryforever]

iakus wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

Look at it this way.  Say you have really bad eyesight, and you need glasses in order to read.  Now let's say the game is a book, and gameplay is your glasses.  If you have really poor glasses, you will struggle to read (ie experience) the story, and it will be difficult to get into the story given how hard it is to read it.  Now imagine you replace those glasses with a pair that lets you see with crystal clarity.  Suddenly the story (no matter its quality) seems better, because you don't have to really work to enjoy it.

Bad gameplay can hinder your experience of a game's story the same way a bad pair of glasses can hinder your experience of a book's story.  That's the way I view it.

As someone who has really bad eyesight and wears glasses, I can definitely answer this:

Don't worry, I do too.  That's why I chose that analogy.  I've had to wear glasses/contacts most of my life.

A pair of prescription glasses is always ideal.  It lets you get the most out of the excperience.  Hoever, if I had to make due with a subpar pair of glasses, or damaged ones, or whatever, I would still try to read the book, regardless.  It is not ideal.  It is not as much fun.  But a good story is worth it.

Gameplay is important.  No arguement.  No doubt.  Fully agree.  It's part of what makes a game fun.  But story, for an rpg at least, is more important.  It's what makes a game worth playing to begin with.

Of course I agree that story is more important, but I don't agree that gameplay is that much less important.  And nowhere near irrelevant, like some people claim.

[Saremei]

Story > all.



Though I find something another poster mentioned funny. Saying story is what brings you back to play it all again, not gameplay. Personally even though I'm a story guy, gameplay is the only thing that brings me back to playing a story game, since playing a story through to completion, I already know what to expect and thus near all fun is lost.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

If the story is all that got me, I'd be weary of playing through it again (assuming I managed to get through it the first time).... gameplay's got to be good for the game to be epic.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 28 octobre 2010 - 12:00 .

[Iakus]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

If the story is all that got me, I'd be weary of playing through it again (assuming I managed to get through it the first time).... gameplay's got to be good for the game to be epic.

Ah, but good stories, be they books, movies, or video games,  are worth experiencing over and over again.  I still play BG 2 from time to time.  Borderlands I played once and shelved. 

[Atmosfear3]

I play games to have fun, even if they are singleplayer games. If I am not having fun because the gameplay sucks, I wouldn't even bother finishing it. I'll put that game up on craigslist or ebay within 24 hours. Like someone earlier said, if I want story I'll turn to books and movies. A good story is simply icing on the cake when it comes to videogames.

Allow me to present an example:

If a video game was a car, the engine would be the gameplay and the story is the exterior paint/look. As a gamer, we are the driver and if the engine of a car is terrible, it doesn't matter how good the car looks if it drives like a piece of crap. On the other hand, a functional car would still get me from A to B no matter how terrible it looks and I would continue to drive it until the next best car.

Modifié par Atmosfear3, 28 octobre 2010 - 12:21 .

[Nightwriter]

iakus wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

If the story is all that got me, I'd be weary of playing through it again (assuming I managed to get through it the first time).... gameplay's got to be good for the game to be epic.

Ah, but good stories, be they books, movies, or video games,  are worth experiencing over and over again.  I still play BG 2 from time to time.  Borderlands I played once and shelved. 

I could play KotOR over and over.

A game without a good story is soulless to me. I'll play through hours of Alan Wake's tedious and repetitive combat just to find out what happens next in the story.

[Iakus]

Atmosfear3 wrote...

I play games to have fun, even if they are singleplayer games. If I am not having fun because the gameplay sucks, I wouldn't even bother finishing it. I'll put that game up on craigslist or ebay within 24 hours. Like someone earlier said, if I want story I'll turn to books and movies. A good story is simply icing on the cake when it comes to videogames.

Allow me to present an example:

If a video game was a car, the engine would be the gameplay and the story is the exterior paint/look. As a gamer, we are the driver and if the engine of a car is terrible, it doesn't matter how good the car looks if it drives like a piece of crap. On the other hand, a functional car would still get me from A to B no matter how terrible it looks and I would continue to drive it until the next best car.

And here I'd compare the car to the gameplay and the story to driving it.  A good car gets you there smoothly and in better comfort.  But there's a world of difference between driving the car to a concert or to the dentist

[Nightwriter]

The story is the engine. The gameplay is the paint job.

[gadna13]

This is a tricky question. Referencing video games in general, I would say that gameplay is more important than story. As far as Mass Effect is concerned in my eyes, story is much more important. With the gameplay nearly perfect in ME2, little focus should be made on changing it around and a lot of time should be put into the story.

[Talthanar]

I gotta go with story for a simple reason is many games have very similar game play however the story really set them apart. This is very easily seen in any kind of flight simulator. Most people play to imitate flying however if one looks at something like Wing Commander or Freespace you're still flying but you've got a real story to deal with too meaning each mission does more than just give a score or e-peen size.



Pass a mission in X time something good happens. Fail to destroy the frigate something bad happens AND you have to face it again later.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

iakus wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

If the story is all that got me, I'd be weary of playing through it again (assuming I managed to get through it the first time).... gameplay's got to be good for the game to be epic.

Ah, but good stories, be they books, movies, or video games,  are worth experiencing over and over again.  I still play BG 2 from time to time.  Borderlands I played once and shelved. 

I'd go for video playthroughs or the game's own theater modes for that.  If it's a great story but the gameplay sucked I wouldn't be tempted to play through it again.  Actually if the gameplay sucked I wouldn't even give the story a chance the first time.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 28 octobre 2010 - 01:42 .

[Nightwriter]

I don't even know what people qualify as "bad gameplay" anymore.

ME1 quality? That's not bad... it doesn't make you unable to finish the game...

KOTOR quality? Not bad... able to finish the game...

I just don't know what people mean. They seem to describe gameplay which reaches out and physically beats you with a cat o' nine tails as you attempt to follow the path of the story. Either they have really high gameplay standards or I have really low gameplay standards.

[Lunatic LK47]

Nightwriter wrote...

I don't even know what people qualify as "bad gameplay" anymore.

ME1 quality? That's not bad... it doesn't make you unable to finish the game...

KOTOR quality? Not bad... able to finish the game...

I just don't know what people mean. They seem to describe gameplay which reaches out and physically beats you with a cat o' nine tails as you attempt to follow the path of the story. Either they have really high gameplay standards or I have really low gameplay standards.

What's considered bad gameplay mechanics-wise:

- Clunky controls (aiming weapons was outright sluggish in ME1, regardless of having cranked up the in-game sensitivity for the controls).

- Nonsensical controls: Very easy to accidentally fire your gun if you want to melee someone (i.e. Feros comes to mind if I want to do a "no-casualty" run without resorting to gas grenades just for the LULZ), Grenades being on the select button, and of course, the very much maligned handling of the Mako.

- Fights that are artificially hard for the sake of being artificially hard with very little to no logic(any mission involving biotics is a main offender in this, considering how they love to spam throw every two seconds keeping you pinned down for an unlimited amount of times until you meet the red screen of death)

[Nightwriter]

I didn't have any problems aiming. What does it matter if you fire your gun instead of elbowing someone? Unlimited ammo. I never got close enough to Feros colonists to hit them, always used grenades. Why does it matter if the grenades are the select button? What's wrong with the mako handling? The constant biotic attacks that make you fall like a ragdoll were annoying, I'll give you that.

None of that made the game unplayable, however.