Submit a Story
Register
Get Started
Webmaster Tools
12 hours 7 mins ago
80
PSP 3000 to support PS3 controller?
58
Resident Evil 2 Remake Coming To Wii?
23 hours 46 mins ago
57
Fancy getting punched in the face for a PS3?
14 hours 28 mins ago
54
51
The new SKU effect
14 hours 45 mins ago
50
Eight Days Cancelled Because Of EyePet
14 hours 7 mins ago
44
Ghostbusters has vanished from Gamestop
8 hours 3 mins ago
41
Advertising To The Next Level That May Make You Say WoW
16 hours 21 mins ago
Comments with -10 or lower "thumbs" are removed from display.
Still, it's possible to create a good story within a single game but I think that it would actually require that all subsequent games in the series be like those in the FF series and actually not be connected. That, of course, isn't that great of an idea except in RPGs.
By the way, just so I don't get flamed by anyone, I just want to say I was joking with my comment. I'm sure that it would probably piss a few people off if they thought I was serious.
Gears of War's storyline sucks balls, IMO. No wait, not IMO, it's actually a literal fact.
But I can't wait for GoW2, because I think it will be much better
I especially hate games that try to be too realistic. That's not what video games are suppost to be about imo
Games seem to draw people in more with it's 'flashyness,' something that movies are getting more and more into, as well. As far as game-to-movie adaptations go, it's because they never truly follow the storylines. Either the crew just can't do it with their budget, technology, etc., wanted to put their own spin on it, whatever the case, movie-to-game and game-to-movie adaptations should be avoided.
But for sure, a game's story is different from that of a movie's. We take control (or get a closer experience) of the adventure in some form or another with games, whilst with movies we can sit back and enjoy. A film's storyline can stand out more, as there are more people into films than games, and a huge crew working on it's story, etc., perhaps trying to work them in the 'real world.'
Movies and Games are two different beasts, movies are short and fun entertainment while games are closer to playable books than anything and thats why i feel they need a better story, currently 98% of all current games in the book world would be the equivelant of childrens books, something short and fun to tide them over before bedtime, the story needs to be like a novel and have multiple plots, twists and turns a proper mature adult story that adults would expect in this kind of medium, they just don't get that right now.
If Nintendo could learn a thing or two from SMBZ that'd be great.
On the other hand, literature requires the author to craft each and every sentence into the grand scheme of the novel. The novel never changes, and while some may interpret it differently, the source material is always the same, and stationary. However, if this same ideal was put in video games, their would be no room to move in the game, meaning you basically are just watching a movie while pressing buttons every once in a while. These two occupy very separate worlds, with only a few unique cases overlapping. However, just because their is a difference, doesn't necessarily mean that one or the other is bad. Video games just tell a story in a different, harder to compare way than other art forms.
There several other fundamental flaws with this argument, and the prevalent views it represents. One such flaw is a comparison between video games and other mediums, such as art movies or novels. While there are certain common elements when judging any art, each form must be judged by its own rules. You don't comment on how balanced the worlds look on a page, just as you don't argue whether a piece of music's notes have another meaning in context with the piece. As I said above, video games have a different mode of storytelling, and must be judged on its own criteria.
Also, the author is far too quick to dismiss the importance of the youth of video games as a story telling medium truly is. Video games have reached the point of being able to tell a story in the last decade or so. This is far too short a time to gain competent writers in the industry, meaning the vast majority of the high profile developers/directors still come from a programing background. This is also too short a time for such games, when they exist, to gain acceptance or an audience. Art is only meaningful to those who seek it out. If no one was willing to listen to Mozart's symphonies, symphonies would not exist. There are few video game connoisseurs, just avid gamers. No classes are offered in video game literature, no video game exhibits in museums, etc. Without a venue for such games, their is no reason for their existence. Even if games are ready to be art, they have no where to be art aside from the collections right beside every other game.
The writer of the story determines what you do and where you go. While you can do things outside of this story, they don't ultimately change the path that is taken at all. You don't get immersed into a game by simply running around blindly, you get drawn in by the story elements and character and plot development. In this regard, it is no different than any book. Look at the way the entire Metal Gear series was written. It is fundamentally no different from a novel or television series. Same thing can be said for most all games, really. Yes, you control the pace that the story unfolds, but how is that different than a person controlling the pace at which they read a book?
While the fundamental difference is creating user control, it should have almost no effect on construction of the story. Any point in the story can be substituted for gameplay, as long as you ultimately start at point A and end at point B.