113758 réponses à ce sujet

[Inverse_Twilight]

Would you like some help?

Ugh... yes. Just get us out of here. 

[Lynroy: Final Edition]

I can get someone to burn through that web. Hope none of you are wearing cotton.

[Inverse_Twilight]

I can get someone to burn through that web. Hope none of you are wearing cotton.

*snip*

Thanks. Remind me to buy Bray a drink later... *falls out of web and lands on her butt* 

[Lynroy: Final Edition]

No problem. Hmmm probably could have put something softer under it to help with the landing.

[Inverse_Twilight]

No problem. Hmmm probably could have put something softer under it to help with the landing.

Yeah, don't worry about it. My butt cushioned my fall. 

[Ashaantha]

*runs around frantically putting out her robes which had caught fire*

[Lynroy: Final Edition]

 

Stop, drop, and roll!

[Inverse_Twilight]

*runs around frantically putting out her robes which had caught fire*

Oh no! *pours a bucket of water on Stormy to put out the flames*

 

You're welcome.

[Ashaantha]

*stands there sopping wet looking a little dejected*

 

thankyou, Verse

[cindercatz]

Spoilered for verbosity:

Spoiler

Thanks! I could talk about this ad nauseum.

Quantic Dream’s games are generally considered rather awful games, though, inasmuch as they are frequently panned as glorified interactive cutscenes, mostly consisting of walking from QTE to QTE. They have more in common with choose your own adventure books than with, say, Dragon Age. I say this secondhand, though, having never played one of the games; my knowledge of QD stems from reading about the games.

Even if we accept that a game like Heavy Rain allows a much greater degree of storytelling agency for players, consider that this comes at the expense of just about everything else Heavy Rain might have been. In other words, the game becomes pure narrative, sans true combat or exploration beyond the narrowest of scopes. And I think that underscores your point about mechanics: a game built entirely around supporting story tends to be lacking in interesting or varied gameplay. You mention variety keeping things from getting stale, but I don’t think that’s variety “across your gameplay experience.” I think the actual gameplay is remaining largely the same. I can play a Telltale story in wildly different ways, but every time I’m still just swiping a joystick one direction or another and hitting a button. Varied experience? Absolutely. Varied gameplay experience? Nope.

I wouldn’t suggest the ideal is the reverse, of course. Historically, the vast majority of games did just that: the story was shoehorned back in to explain what was going on, and few games even had dedicated writers attached. I like to point to Gears of War as a good example of this, as Gears 3 was the first game in the series to bring in an actual writer to guide the project and I think that the characters, dialogue, and plotting all are demonstrably superior to what was in the prior games.

But successful games (like Gears 3) acknowledge the nature of the medium in their design and place gameplay and story on equal pedestals. Writers keep in mind the player experience while crafting their story, and level designers and characters are keeping in mind how this environment or set piece or weapon fits in with the story world.

I think, though, these are still somewhat different conversations. Mechanics and story are deeply interdependent, and focusing on one comes to the detriment of the other, just as you say. But the same goes for player agency: few games allow for true variety in play style in a way which meaningfully impacts plot, or for variety in story choices which meaningfully impact gameplay. What we get tends to be just a taste, but nothing really substantial.

For example, Bioshock presents the moral choice of harvesting or rescuing the Little Sisters, and at least for a little while this does have a real impact on how you play by limiting your ADAM reserves. But eventually Bioshock walks back that impact with Tenenbaum’s rewards, so playing as a savior or harvester doesn’t end up feeling terribly different by game’s end. On the other end of things (play style impacting plot), games like Dishonored do a good job of offering varied strategies to conquering challenges, and these decisions eventually shape the state of the world, but mostly Dishonored leaves the impact of your choices for the closing credits rather than memorably shaping your experience as you progress through the game.

I don’t think we disagree per se, but I hesitate when I read “build your game to serve your story” because that reminds me of what Eric Zimmerman refers to as “cinema envy,” when games are trying too hard to be movies, and interactivity just gets in the way of the story the game maker wanted to tell. Branching story paths don’t necessarily preclude that classification either, insomuch as most of these games still have very few destinations. Case in point: Life Is Strange had so many interesting choices that felt consequential as one played through each episode, but every person who plays Life is Strange ends up at one of two conclusions no matter how they played the game, even if neither ending seems to be in keeping with their prior approach to decision-making.

This is a lot of thinking out loud, of course. And I think value judgments need to be separate from critiques of what is or isn’t a game, or conducive to the nature of games; even if a product is guilty of terrible “cinema envy,” it could still be an experience well worth having. My interest is in determining whether that particular story would have been better suited in a different medium, or whether the interactivity (even if it’s just choosing between two or three otherwise pre-made tracks) is fundamental to the experience the creator(s) wanted to convey.

I'll keep with the spoiler tag theme here :-) And I'll try to break it up a little for ease of reading's sake.

Spoiler

I really do recommend you give Quantic Dream's games a shot for yourself, and I think you'll see where I'm going with this. But I'll give a few more examples of what I'm talking about as we go on.

Quantic Dream and QTE:
When I think QTE, I think of God of War, Naruto Ultimate Ninja Storm, things like that, games where QTEs are basically cut scenes that require you to enter some stock on screen prompt. And if you fail, well, try try again. So I'm not particularly fond of those, moreso in GoW. Heavy Rain in particular is never remotely similar to that. Then I think of Shenmue, one of my other top three games all time, with Final Fantasy 7. Shenmue included the occasional QTE, basically in place of a few cut scenes, but they mimicked the actual combat controls, and you learned new moves to go and practice up, things like that. Shenmue got a little crazy with them towards the end of Shenmue 2, but wow, what a game. I seriously recommend those as well if you get the chance. Heavy Rain rarely uses a form of QTE, primarily for combat, but combat itself is rare, and Heavy Rain does something really special with it.

In Heavy Rain, gameplay is designed around the idea that everything is intuitive. So if you're manipulating an object, combing your hair, driving, crawling, climbing, juggling, or trying to get your kid ready for school, every input of your controller corresponds to how you would intuitively translate that movement to the controller. It makes use of motion sensitivity as well. What you choose to do is up to you the vast majority of the time, how fast or slow, how successful or unsuccessful. How you spend your time and the physical choices you make can greatly alter the narrative, and everything has a consequence, along with every thought you choose or dialogue response you make. There are something like 24 vastly different ending character resolutions for the primary cast, and those are further interspersed, depending on how your characters interact throughout the game, not to mention all the small and large ripple effects throughout the game. Then there are what people call QTEs. These aren't like any other QTEs. They are dependent on player choice, they're in keeping with the same intuitive movement gameplay throughout the game. They do not stop, do not repeat, and each moment of the scene changes according to success or failure, and the snap decisions you make. The entire narrative of the game can be drastically altered right in the middle of these "QTEs". Your primary characters in the story can actually die on the spot, and there's no game over and no repeat, try again. Any wounds you take remain throughout the entire game, and effect everything from the way your characters move and interact to whole subplot resolutions. Seriously, anybody crying QTE about this is vastly underselling it, or they just plain haven't played it. Or they might be frustrated with an outcome, that's possible. This is seriously the best, most engaging gameplay I've ever played. I wish more games would attempt gameplay on this level. Honestly I think there's just too much time and effort involved. They spend like five years dev time per game.

Tell Tale:
Probably my second favorite developer right now, because of the focus on strong branching narrative. It doesn't even approach what Quantic Dream does, though. Tell Tale's games are actually built on a common gameplay mechanic, stories wrapped around that. It's just that that mechanic is point and click adventure games. I recommend playing their Sam and Max games as well, where branching narrative wasn't even a thing. They were just well written, snappily paced adventure games. Probably the funniest games I've played. They've gotta be like one of two or three remaining adventure game studios with any real budget.

Then there's Witcher 3, that you mentioned. Practically every major plot point, character relationship, and sidequest has major branching, or in the monster hunting sidequests, the potential for a twist ending. The reason the game is so great, really, comes down to branching narrative and top class presentation. The same game with static story wouldn't get anywhere near this response. The gameplay, as great as it is, is basically playing catch up with the storytelling.

For a game built primarily around great gameplay to the detriment of the story, I'd look at MGS V. It's still got some great moments, but its story is almost entirely contained in a sparse set of very good cutscenes, and whether you treat Quiet well or not on missions. MGS 4 is a far better game overall in my opinion, because the story carries strongly throughout and the gameplay adjusts to suit it, rather than the other way round. Which doesn't mean I don't really enjoy MGS V; it's just my least favorite of the series.

Other great games where the gameplay followed after the storytelling (not branching narrative specifically): Steambot Chronicles, Bayonetta, Final Fantasy 7 & 8, Xenogears series, Saints Row 3rd and 4th (crazy stuff, but think about the design process and you'll see what I mean), Blazblue fighting series

Gameplay first games: Obviously any puzzle game, DA:I, Gears of War or any of these basic shooters, sports titled, DOA and plenty of fighting games

The trend there is that a game that starts and really ends with gameplay tends to try to find one golden system and stick with it, focus on environments after that (as sandboxes or a prop house), and ends up without much or undermined narrative strength. Gears came off that way to me from the beginning, so I never had any interest in it. DA:I, the focus on just tons of combat and giant sandboxes really undercut the strong companion story content. They chose to focus their efforts and budget far more on gameplay and level design than they should have. The games that are story first (or crazy notion first in SR's case) tend to throw the kitchen sink at you, but everything involved serves the story, the characters, the world. Mixing up the gameplay experience is a driving goal, not a throw in. I generally much prefer those games. They don't get old and stale the way these primarily mechanic based games tend to. They don't lose my interest halfway through.

There are exceptions, y'know, DOA or Tekken, I'll probably always like them just as much, but at the same time, those are fighting games where the variety of gameplay from character to character is a focus, and those details do follow their character concepts, and their place in the story. They're a little different breed. Sports games, like NBA 2K, it's generally as much or more about improvements in story elements, the Franchise, MyPlayer, etc. modes year over year as any gameplay improvement at this point. Not always, but typically.

So I know that idea is out there, "cinema envy", but I don't prescribe to it at all. I think if you're ambitious enough, you're going to get labeled by people that don't appreciate what you're doing. I think the idea of "cinema envy" basically comes from a combination of low expectations and genre snobbery, honestly. Great games can also be great narratives, great interactive storytelling platforms. That doesn't make them any less a game or less than any movie in that area. Having cinematic qualities or the presence of cut scenes does nothing to dimenish the game and can seriously enhance the storytelling at the same time. It's more that some people try to pigeonhole what constitutes a game or takes too much influence from other media, and all that really does is put nonsense constraints on the medium. The industry would be a lot worse off without those games, or had they lived within those same boundaries.

[Lynroy: Final Edition]

Sorry about that. *tries to hide laughter* How about I buy you a cider? 

[Inverse_Twilight]

*stands there sopping wet looking a little dejected*

 

thankyou, Verse

Don't worry, Stormy, I got your back.

[Ashaantha]

Sorry about that. *tries to hide laughter* How about I buy you a cider? 

 

*cheers up*

I never say no to a cider!

[Serza]

Serza, I have to ask you - are you in some territorial army thing or something?

 

...actually, nope. What brought that on?

 

It's just a hobby for me.

(Though the only people who know more about the military here are the ones who actually served, I dare say)

 

Is the thread still drinking for stuff like this?

 

Or are we at the point where it's just easier to bang your head against a wall until concussed?

 

Yup, bottoms up.

 

And I once banged my head on the wall intentionally. Hard enough to feel really funny afterwards. I lived, didn't even need a doctor, so it wasn't a concussion, but it was a proper one.

 

*calls up to everyone from down in the web* I'm OK! Thanks, I didn't really think that through...

 

ETA: I am also stuck in the web... little help?

 

I wanted to help, but...

 

*looks over at Stormy who is now caught in the web with her* How did that happen? 

 

...I was kind of...

 

*runs around frantically putting out her robes which had caught fire*

 

...asleep...?

[Lynroy: Final Edition]

*cheers up*

I never say no to a cider!

Sorry, was finishing all quests in the Approach. Your cider is on my tab.

[Serza]

...hey, Paragon. If I'm making you uncomfortable with my bullshit, just say the word. I'll disappear before I make it any worse.

 

 

 

Hmm. Think I'll find time to bring Lyna through Trespasser this year, or is the poor lass waiting for 2016 for that?

[Rel Fexive]

Is the thread still drinking for stuff like this?

Or are we at the point where it's just easier to bang your head against a wall until concussed?

Well the sarcasm fish got in kinda early on that one, so.....

Hey guys,

I found out that I have to work on Christmas Eve. Damn it!

*stabs Cardboard Maryden in the t*t, then punts a nug across the bar* That actually kind of helped. Lol.

Anyway, how is everyone else doing?

I just looked in the dictionary - the entry for "pants" quotes your post here.


'pants' meaning bad, btw

[Rel Fexive]

Yrch, stupid tablet messing up postings.

[Serza]

Well the sarcasm fish got in kinda early on that one, so.....


I just looked in the dictionary - the entry for "pants" quotes your post here.


'pants' meaning bad, btw

 

Huh? Am I the sarcasm fish? THat's... doubtful, to be honest.

[Rel Fexive]

Huh? Am I the sarcasm fish? THat's... doubtful, to be honest.

I think we both swam in early with the mockery in that thread

[Serza]

...I love swimming. (I actually can't swim well, but I do love water.)

[Lynroy: Final Edition]

I found myself again in DAI!

 

So weird to see it.

[Rel Fexive]

I found myself again in DAI!

 

So weird to see it.

 

There was probably no further correspondence because she was critical of his spelling and grammar

[Serza]

I found myself again in DAI!

 

So weird to see it.

 

*CONTENT REMOVED - REASON: BECAUSE I CAN*

 

That's awesome!

[Paragonslustre]

...hey, Paragon. If I'm making you uncomfortable with my bullshit, just say the word. I'll disappear before I make it any worse.

 

 

 

Hmm. Think I'll find time to bring Lyna through Trespasser this year, or is the poor lass waiting for 2016 for that?

 

Wut?!  I don't want anyone to disappear ever because of me!  I'd rather go first - in an heroic manner of course, a bit like the HoF    No, the reason I asked if you were in the TA (I don't know what the Czech equivalent is) is because sometimes in your posts you mention guns (well, I am assuming they are guns, I didn't bother to google them because I couldn't be arsed).  It would be a bit hypocritical of me to feel uncomfortable, I'm always blasting limbs off in FO4