I Would Like Your Opinions

[fugibo]

Who else thinks that games (at least story-based ones, such as RPGs) need a hell of a lot more story to them? As in, the story is actually influential on the game, rather than stuff you see between button presses.

IMO, most games use stories for two purposes:

• To tell you where to go next. I mean, you're gonna need to know, but it's more of a "Well, the next castle is named 'Spinarax' sort of thing" most of the time than inference/background information. Maybe if they made you investigate to find out something (y'know, drop the big bits like what your goal is &c. in a main cutscene, then let you talk to other people for the rest) it would be a lot more entertaining. Plus, for "open-ended" games like Fable, storylines made in this manner would be much more malleable.
  
• To entertain immersively, which wouldn't be bad, except that it's more like mashing buttons to watch TV than it is immersion most of the time. During those times, I'm much more likely to just watch a movie or read, since those are dramatically less expensive hobbies and provide much more entertainment for how much effort I have to put in.

I've gotten to the point where I don't even play RPGs any more because the general game play is much more of a boring grind than anything immersive or stress-relieving. The last RPG I played through was 358/2 Days since it was actually simple and entertaining while in-battle, and the missions were usually short enough that I got a good dose of story every 30-45 minutes.

and opine now pl0x

[Ryex]

Who else thinks that games (at least story-based ones, such as RPGs) need a hell of a lot more story to them? As in, the story is actually influential on the game, rather than stuff you see between button presses.

IMO, most games use stories for two purposes:

• To tell you where to go next. I mean, you're gonna need to know, but it's more of a "Well, the next castle is named 'Spinarax' sort of thing" most of the time than inference/background information. Maybe if they made you investigate to find out something (y'know, drop the big bits like what your goal is &c. in a main cutscene, then let you talk to other people for the rest) it would be a lot more entertaining. Plus, for "open-ended" games like Fable, storylines made in this manner would be much more malleable.
  
• To entertain immersively, which wouldn't be bad, except that it's more like mashing buttons to watch TV than it is immersion most of the time. During those times, I'm much more likely to just watch a movie or read, since those are dramatically less expensive hobbies and provide much more entertainment for how much effort I have to put in.

Golden Sun, my friend, is your perfect RPG

[C.C. rOyAl]

Lol that wasn't unexpected.

What would you play the RPG on? Like a console or PS3, if console which one

[fugibo]

Lol that wasn't unexpected.

What would you play the RPG on? Like a console or PS3, if console which one

How is that relevant? For the record, the only modern game systems I have are my DS (fat), PSP (fat) and my Wii. So I'd have to play it on one of those. But I'd much prefer to have it on my laptop or phone, since I always have my phone with me, and I carry my laptop all over the place.

[Blizzard]

This topic is way too smart for SPAM. *moves*

[RoseSkye]

I agree with you, and I'm also shocked that you can make a post like this.

[Diokatsu]

Who else thinks that games (at least story-based ones, such as RPGs) need a hell of a lot more story to them? As in, the story is actually influential on the game, rather than stuff you see between button presses.

IMO, most games use stories for two purposes:

• To tell you where to go next. I mean, you're gonna need to know, but it's more of a "Well, the next castle is named 'Spinarax' sort of thing" most of the time than inference/background information. Maybe if they made you investigate to find out something (y'know, drop the big bits like what your goal is &c. in a main cutscene, then let you talk to other people for the rest) it would be a lot more entertaining. Plus, for "open-ended" games like Fable, storylines made in this manner would be much more malleable.
  
• To entertain immersively, which wouldn't be bad, except that it's more like mashing buttons to watch TV than it is immersion most of the time. During those times, I'm much more likely to just watch a movie or read, since those are dramatically less expensive hobbies and provide much more entertainment for how much effort I have to put in.

Golden Sun, my friend, is your perfect RPG

How about Chrono Trigger sorry.

[winkio]

I'd just say it's hard to make an engaging 20+ hour story.  It seems to me it would have to be either constant chaos or span a ridiculous length of game time to achieve such a thing.  That's why I always think of story as taking a backseat to gameplay within the gaming arena.

That said, I think that stories can be much more effectively implemented.  There is a lot of dead space in many games, where story can just disappear for hours at a time.  I think it is possible to implement a story more efficiently such as to keep the player more interested.  For example, instead of having to travel for 20 minutes through a wilderness to continue the story in another town, there could be stuff that happens along the way that is important.

[Blizzard]

But it's very bothersome to make and even watch a piece of story / a cutscene every other map in the game. Sure, stories are good, but don't get forget that this is supposed to be a game, not a movie.

[Ryex]

Who else thinks that games (at least story-based ones, such as RPGs) need a hell of a lot more story to them? As in, the story is actually influential on the game, rather than stuff you see between button presses.

IMO, most games use stories for two purposes:

• To tell you where to go next. I mean, you're gonna need to know, but it's more of a "Well, the next castle is named 'Spinarax' sort of thing" most of the time than inference/background information. Maybe if they made you investigate to find out something (y'know, drop the big bits like what your goal is &c. in a main cutscene, then let you talk to other people for the rest) it would be a lot more entertaining. Plus, for "open-ended" games like Fable, storylines made in this manner would be much more malleable.
  
• To entertain immersively, which wouldn't be bad, except that it's more like mashing buttons to watch TV than it is immersion most of the time. During those times, I'm much more likely to just watch a movie or read, since those are dramatically less expensive hobbies and provide much more entertainment for how much effort I have to put in.

Golden Sun, my friend, is your perfect RPG

How about Chrono Trigger sorry.

good point Chrono trigger is the only other RPG I know of that has good story development.

[Diokatsu]

How about a game like Morrowind. The main  quest wasn't even important, but the game world itself engaged you far more than any linear game. The story doesn't have to big immersive itself, the world should immerse you in the story. Morrowinf would constantly remind you of the overlying enviorment, about how the Empire rules you and Emporer himself as well as mainland vs natives motif which definately engaged me in a way that linear RPGs and particularly JRPGs couldn't. Creating an interesting and real world is much more dynamic than creating stories that work to engage the player.

And to that extant, stories that integrate well with their enviorments tend to find more success than ones that try and keep the story as overlying plots. In Morrowind, again, for example, you could ask anyone about the current goings on of your quest and they'd tell you what they'd know or the rumors they had heard about it. It was a bit repetitve after a while, but it definately served to make the game feel realistic. People actually knew about and cared that you were doing things in the main story outside of helping them with individual side quests.

[Blizzard]

It's a different type of game. It doesn't indulge you with a story but with a feeling that the environment is actually real. It feels as if you were there. Of course, as real life that's sometimes not as interesting as a good movie/story. But it's fun in its own way.

[winkio]

Surrealism >> realism.  Games that take you to a place you've never been before are the ones that people generally find most interesting.

[fugibo]

1) "Extant" is an adjective that means "it exists," "extent", the word you were looking for, means something similar to "length" in that crazy colloquial context

2) I'm talking more about RPGs and the evolution of games as a story-telling genre, I'm not saying that a fun gameplay-oriented game shouldn't exist, I'm saying that a game like an RPG should really be much more immersive. At least, I'd like it that way.

3) I'm tired as hell, ready to watch End of Time Part 2 and I'll get back to you guys tomorrow. Have fun, CP.

[Cid]

Maybe if they made you investigate to find out something (y'know, drop the big bits like what your goal is &c. in a main cutscene, then let you talk to other people for the rest) it would be a lot more entertaining.

This is pretty much how Dragon Quest handles things. You're often encouraged to find out the details for yourself as opposed to being spoon fed everything in an overly long cut-scene.

[tSwitch]

I wish there would be more games like this as well.

People want a straight hallway with a box of gold at the end of it, they don't want to have to figure out how to get there, so that's what devs give them.

[Calintz]

I don't know NAMKOR.. .. ..
Zelda always made me work pretty hard for that treasure chest, and I loved those games.

The Xenosaga series is a good example of games that have cutscenes too long, however, I did enjoy simply setting back and laying the controller down and watching, so I can't complain. I know this answer is right here in the open, but the only thing that I can say is that I believe an RPG needs to have a nice blend of both.

The battlesystem has to grip the player in a way as to not bore them while they make their way through a redundant world.. .. ..The game needs to get to the point using only a few delays and minor setbacks along the way. This should keep the player interested, and keep a relatively short period of boredom.. .. ..

[tSwitch]

the problem is that nobody wants to think.
they want action and they want a clear straight path to their objective.

I miss the time when there was no such thing as a battle that you were 'supposed to lose', and things were just naturally freaking difficult.

[Blizzard]

I like battles that you're supposed to lose. ._.

I agree with you that nobody wants to think. People are just like that. :/

[Calintz]

This is what I like about monster hunter for the PSP.
Sure, the storyline is practically nonexistant, but depending on the mission, you can die just as easily as the day you picked up the game.
Makes the game all the more enjoyable to play if you ask me.. .. ..

Here's my two cents.. .. ..
I don't have as much a problem thinking about how to solve puzzles and stuff, as much as I have a problem with a constant encounter rate while trying to solve the problem. I think this is an underlying reason as to why many players don't like to think anymore. They dread the thought of spending two or three hours in a dungeon; not because the puzzles are difficult here say, but because you just have so many pointless battles with monsters that are too easy to kill.

Especially the kind of battle that the enemy is too fast to run from, but can't hurt the party.. .. ..In this sense, you lose interest and joy as the battles quickly become more monotonous and repetitive than any player truly likes.. .. ..