All video-game Quests are obligatory & irrelevent...

[Gruff]

@ gahnzz

Thanks for reminding me of Bioshock! Would you mind sharing more of your favorite games?

 

@ CalibanX

Interesting questions! I will be lecturing on a similar subject in a few months, so I'm really enjoying this conversation. The re-playing/re-reading/re-watching theme is a new angle. Now storytelling can be defined in many ways, but in some ways Skyrim has been the most powerful story experience I've ever had :)

[Rennn]

"Look at some of the mod quests. Certain ones play out with more story than some books. Or look at Mass Effect; the story itself is a bit trite, but the characters are firmly a cut above 90% of books.

This is coming from a person who loves books."

 

90%? Perhaps you're not reading the right books? ;)

 

Almost certainly not, considering I've read a lot of books. That generally seems to happen when you can read faster than you speak -_-

I don't know if you've played Mass Effect 2, but there's a reason why thousands of fans are on the forums every day buying shirts that say "I support Tali'Zorah for Mass Effect 3"

I've found people (online, not in person), who think of the Mass Effect characters more like people than characters. This isn't something you see from the majority of books.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Rennn

[abaris]

 

I've found people (online, not in person), who think of the Mass Effect characters more like people than characters. This isn't something you see from the majority of books.

 

You don't see it from the majority of games either.

 

Sure, there will always be the ones carried away by the hype. Otherwise there wouldn't be star trek conventions and the likes. I would simply say, that book lovers usually don't promote their favorite characters on the internet.

 

Personally I can't understand fandom that goes to such lengths, but obviously I'm not a sports fan either. I'm always a little bit cautious when fiction beats reality in people's minds.

[Shantih]

 

I've found people (online, not in person), who think of the Mass Effect characters more like people than characters. This isn't something you see from the majority of books.

 

You don't see it from the majority of games either.

 

Sure, there will always be the ones carried away by the hype. Otherwise there wouldn't be star trek conventions and the likes. I would simply say, that book lovers usually don't promote their favorite characters on the internet.

 

Personally I can't understand fandom that goes to such lengths, but obviously I'm not a sports fan either. I'm always a little bit cautious when fiction beats reality in people's minds.

 

I think that it has to do with the fact that games can't rely on subtlety and people in real life don't go around staying in character or acting like they are supposed to all the time.

 

Most of us could probably predict how Alistair from DAO would react to any given situation or comment on any event since we have figured him out pretty well after playing the game a few times.

 

Interestingly enough David Gaider has been reported saying that he had been inspired by Xander from Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Malcolm Reynolds from Firefly. Both characters have very strong and definite traits and both have a large number of fans on the net.

 

F3 and NV both were good games, essentially cut from the same Bethesda cloth. Personally, I found absolutely nothing particularly interesting in any of the NPC's or quests in NV. In fact, I quickly grew bored of it. It has no where near the amount of quests that Skyrim has. This is an especially relevant point given how often there are threads complaining about how short the Guild quest lines in Skyrim are. NV had NO Guild quests at all. What it did have that resonated well with players was not better writing in terms of story or quests, but rather they implemented an intuitively appealing Reputation system with lots of different factions. Skyrim has more quest-related and exploring content than F3 or NV, and yes, it would be cool if the Reputation/Faction system of NV could be ported over to Skyrim, but I think it's almost adolescent to think that NV or some other video game represents some kind of excellence in literature in it's main quest or side quest scenarios compared to Skyrim.

 

F3 and FNV may look the same but FNV is a true Fallout game where F3 was a Bethesda game (very much Oblivion with real dialogues and no silly speechwheel).

 

YOU can't appreciate the story in FNV that doesn't mean that the story is not good. Skyrim has quantity, FNV has quality.

 

FNV doesn't need guild quests. You've never played the original Fallout to assume that guild quests are needed. In FNV you can work for various factions and increase your reputation with these factions which IMO is a better way to handle factions than having some sort of guild quests that have you run around for a while before making you the head honcho like in Skyrim.

 

Look at the dialogue in FNV as a script and look at the dialogue in Skyrim. Dialogue is a big part of characterization. See if you can tell the difference between these games (I doubt you will anyway).

 

What the hell are you still going on about "excellence in literature"? Do you think that there is such a thing as literary excellence in TV shows or movies? There are good scripts and bad scripts. What you've been saying is that the script is irrelevant and that is a very misguided statement. Writing does matter. Good and bad writing can be found anywhere.

 

Good writing in a videogame or in a TV show can make you laugh or move you and that's what matters. Bad writing will have you skip through dialogues like you do. Following your logic the absence of real dialogue like in Oblivion is a better solution. You have topics that you can click on if you want to and no "real" writing or characterisation through dialogue... In a book you can build a character through descriptions, narration and a subtle use of language whereas in a TV show/movie/videogame you only have physical appearance, visual clues, some body language and dialogues. TV shows and movies can rely on actors to convey many things and be subtle where videogames have to rely on animations that are usually shared by many other NPCs and don't convey a character's uniqueness so I would argue that bad writing in a videogame can be worse because actors can only "sell it" with their voices (voice acting vs acting).

 

If you want to see what good writing in a videogame looks like try Planescape Torment, Chris Avellone was the lead designer for this game and he can write. His involvement in FNV certainly made it a better game.

 

FYI literature is a different medium. What works for a novel rarely works on film. It needs to be transposed to fit in on the screen. When you study movies you don't look for the same things, you have to take into account the specificity of the medium. If you plan on studying videogames you have to do the same. Just like when you are studying literature you don't apply the same principles when you are studying a novel, a poem or a play. You also have to take into account genre.

 

If you want to discuss the finer points of literature relating to game fiction then instead of looking at videogames you should consider David Gaider's Dragon Age novels or R. A. Salvatore's Drizzt novels but you shouldn't compare them to novels by Charles Dickens or Jane Austen. That would be pointless.

 

F3 and NV both were good games, essentially cut from the same Bethesda cloth. Personally, I found absolutely nothing particularly interesting in any of the NPC's or quests in NV. In fact, I quickly grew bored of it. It has no where near the amount of quests that Skyrim has.

 

Which, as I said in the beginning, is your opinion. Obviously you are not into story-playing and want more action. Perfectly all right, but don't present it as a general truth. It isn't.

 

I'm still not bored with FNV. I'm still discovering something new. I had my fun with Skyrim, but there I really got bored, since there's always more of the same. Crawl into cave, kill some Draugr, kill a Dragon on the way and that's about it.

 

Yes, that's my opinion. It's a good game, took up some of my time and certainly was worth it's money. But it isn't Bethesda's gift to humanity. Certainly not when it comes to storytelling, as Howard openly admits, although he kind of hides his words behind the "grand vista" PR veil. Truth is, it is quantity before quality. An endless stream of quests, which are actually just a handful in a hamster wheel.

 

Did i say I was "not into story playing and want more action"? I didn't. As I've said from the beginning, the stories one typically finds in all video games are of the relative depth and narrative quality that one finds in video games. Which is to say, they are all pretty lame when compared with the story-telling you get in other mediums. I then said, that I didn't necessarily even think this was a bad thing as video games strengths are things like fighting, sneaking, exploring, etc and that these are the activities that one spends the overwhelming amount of their time doing anyway. And I'm cool with that.

 

However, I am curious as to these amazing stories and tons of unique encounters you're encountering in New Vegas? Care to elaborate? When I played, it was mostly a lot of shooting at "bandits" with a few monsters and robots thrown in. I fail to see how the enemies in NV are so captivating and varied compared with Skyrim.

 

You can't pretend that you value story over action. Everything you've posted in this thread points to the opposite. You've said that you feel the need to skip dialogues to get to the good part of the game when replaying (I'm rephrasing, the quote is below). That is simply not what someone who cares about stories and want to get immersed into the game would do (even on a second or third playthrough).

 

I completely agree with Abaris regarding FNV and I find this game rewarding provided you take the time to get into it and not simply go through the Mojave shooting things. That reminds me of people complaining about the Honest Hearts DLC when they simply rushed through it and never bothered to explore the new locations and completely missed the Survivalist story (which is an instance of good writing in a videogame, creating atmosphere and bringing into the game the idea of what surviving the apocalypse could be like).

 

Eventually, it just becomes too familiar and you speed past it to get back to the "meat" of the game: exploring, fighting, sneaking, collecting, whatever.... these are the sorts of things video games do well. And I don't see that dramatically changing any time soon. And I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing. For someone like me who happens to love exploring, fighting, sneaking/stealing, collecting, etc; Skyrim is a dream come true.

 

It's very ironic to read that part of one of your posts on the first page since it seems to me that you may have missed a lot of FNV by getting straight to the "meat" of the game. Someone who loves exploring so much should have picked up some of the stories that are strewn around in FNV

 

The Survivalist story was just an example by the way. Many players who play these games by simply relying on quest markers and arrows and shoot their way through the game missed it.

 

FNV is also a game that you can replay in different ways, it's actually a game that you have to finish at least three times if you want to see most general endings (a bit like the Witcher 1). There are different ways to finish quests in FNV and there is some depth in the game as what you do will have some bearing on what happens to the game. Skyrim goes only halfway since some quests are more polished than others (some have more replayability because they take you to different places on different playthroughs).

 

The real problem is when the game engine prevents the story from being told and that's the case every time there is a big battle. In any of these games big battles are turned into skirmishes because the engine can't handle the number of characters that would be required to make large scale battles work.

 

So I would argue that there are limitations that are imposed on the writing and that is true of any visual medium and the reason why I said in my first post in this thread:

 

Literature is superior to games and visual mediums because it is not limited in any way but I can't agree with such an extreme point of view when it comes to the importance of stories to games.

 

I'm sorry for having to quote myself but I think I had to in order to get this point across.

 

I can prove it to you. I assume most people here have read the Lord of the Rings and seen the movies. Well, in the first movie there is a scene in Rivendell in which Frodo reaches out to grasp the ring and take it from Frodo. We can distinctly see Frodo being morphed into some sort of horrid little monster before changing back to his own self as the urge to take the ring subsides -this is fine for a movie but this is absolutely not what the book tells us:

 

"Bilbo put out his hand. But Frodo quickly drew back the Ring. To his distress and amazement he found that he was no longer looking at Bilbo; a shadow seemed to have fallen between them, and through it he found himself eyeing a little wrinkled creature with a hungry face and bony groping hands. He felt a desire to strike him."

 

There is a clear shift in perspective. In the movie we witness the effect of the Ring on Bilbo whereas in the novel we witness the effect of the Ring on both of them and the change that the Ring has provoked in Frodo's mind. I'll let you decide for yourself which version is the most interesting as far as storytelling and character development are concerned.

[HideInLight]

The only movie I've been able to watch more than once was Jurassic Park. Even since then any movie I tired re-watching bored me to death unless it was a very old film I've completely forgotten about.I found it a lot easier to re-watch stuff when I was a kid...

 

The problem with any story is that once you've experienced it the magic is gone, no more surprises. All good things come to an end. And if a story is predictable, well it just becomes boring.

 

Another problem relating to skyrim for example.

The implementation of epic moments like the fight against the "evil dragon" which you heard about during the game wasn't so epic in the cutscene...

Edited January 6, 2012 by HideInLight

[thesapien]

Lame.

I mean that literally.

Before books there were poets and prophets. You dishonor them.

Never seen a great play?

Today, we have a medium that borrows from all elements of all types of storytelling, could even include your favorite novels within, yet you're too lame to see it.

[CalibanX]

Perhaps my observations are more directed at an older audience.

 

I suppose if I was 15 and didn't have decades worth of reading books and watching movies I probably would be more affected by the kinds of stories one finds in video games. Obviously, a video game quest that appeals to you is going to be better than one that doesn't. But due to the massively repetitive nature of video games, any narrative content is eventually bound to get old. When this happens, it's the design of the game that makes one want to continue playing it. If you want to sit thought every line of dialogue on every quest after the 10th time you've done it, then that's great for you. But, once I already know exactly what's going to happen, it's just not that captivating anymore. And replaying video games is not in any way equivalent to rewatching movies or rereading books. A 30 second video game cut scene animation sandwiched between hours of button mashing is simply not enough to pull at my heart strings. Especially after you've already seen it 10 times.

[Shantih]

Perhaps my observations are more directed at an older audience.

 

I suppose if I was 15 and didn't have decades worth of reading books and watching movies I probably would be more affected by the kinds of stories one finds in video games. Obviously, a video game quest that appeals to you is going to be better than one that doesn't. But due to the massively repetitive nature of video games, any narrative content is eventually bound to get old. When this happens, it's the design of the game that makes one want to continue playing it. If you want to sit thought every line of dialogue on every quest after the 10th time you've done it, then that's great for you. But, once I already know exactly what's going to happen, it's just not that captivating anymore. And replaying video games is not in any way equivalent to rewatching movies or rereading books. A 30 second video game cut scene animation sandwiched between hours of button mashing is simply not enough to pull at my heart strings. Especially after you've already seen it 10 times.

 

Then you should take your discussion into an old people's home (sorry couldn't resist).

 

Seriously, don't assume that the people posting here are teenagers because they can enjoy roleplaying and stories in videogames when you obviously can't. I don't know if you are jaded or if you simply care about the gaming part more than the rest (which seems to be the case if we're going by your posts in this thread).

 

It seems to me that you are running of arguments. Repeating your personal bias as if you were preaching is not helping.

 

FYI being patronizing to other posters only make you look bad. :down:

 

And so you know some 15 year olds have a better idea of what makes good stories than many 40 year olds (if we are to believe your profile) so pulling the age card is well rather pointless (a bit like this thread quite frankly).

 

Have fun airing your misconceptions (that's what I call your "observations"), because this is getting old. If you are going to repeat the same arguments over and over again without taking into account other posters then you may as well talk to yourself... Not that it seems to be troubling you anyway.

[CalibanX]

Perhaps my observations are more directed at an older audience.

 

I suppose if I was 15 and didn't have decades worth of reading books and watching movies I probably would be more affected by the kinds of stories one finds in video games. Obviously, a video game quest that appeals to you is going to be better than one that doesn't. But due to the massively repetitive nature of video games, any narrative content is eventually bound to get old. When this happens, it's the design of the game that makes one want to continue playing it. If you want to sit thought every line of dialogue on every quest after the 10th time you've done it, then that's great for you. But, once I already know exactly what's going to happen, it's just not that captivating anymore. And replaying video games is not in any way equivalent to rewatching movies or rereading books. A 30 second video game cut scene animation sandwiched between hours of button mashing is simply not enough to pull at my heart strings. Especially after you've already seen it 10 times.

 

Then you should take your discussion into an old people's home (sorry couldn't resist).

 

Seriously, don't assume that the people posting here are teenagers because they can enjoy roleplaying and stories in videogames when you obviously can't. I don't know if you are jaded or if you simply care about the gaming part more than the rest (which seems to be the case if we're going by your posts in this thread).

 

It seems to me that you are running of arguments. Repeating your personal bias as if you were preaching is not helping.

 

FYI being patronizing to other posters only make you look bad. :down:

 

And so you know some 15 year olds have a better idea of what makes good stories than many 40 year olds (if we are to believe your profile) so pulling the age card is well rather pointless (a bit like this thread quite frankly).

 

Have fun airing your misconceptions (that's what I call your "observations"), because this is getting old. If you are going to repeat the same arguments over and over again without taking into account other posters then you may as well talk to yourself... Not that it seems to be troubling you anyway.

 

Relax, dude. I keep having to repeat myself because you keep flying off into these unrelated tangents. If the mere suggestion that video game quests can get old with frequent replaying is enough to offend your personal sacred cow, then forget it.

[Sindrie]

Bioshock had a amaizing story, in fact it's hailed as one of the, if not THEE best story in a video game and it's pretty awesome it had a freakin m night shyamalan TWEEST (twist).