Games don't need stories.

[Reasonable]

richardhutnik said:

WolfGangRilei said:

Left 4 dead 2 is not a game to play for story, because we all know it sucks when you play it on single player, it like most of Valve's game's are all about the multiplayer, and i have no clue why anyone would buy L4D2 for an epic story, the main focus on the game is multiplayer, always been.

Sometimes i love to play games with great stories, but a game with great multiplayer  such as Unreal tournament, does not need a story at all.

RPG's? need great stories, because more than often it will be a single player long experience, and if it has no story, it has no appeal, no multiplayer to back it up, so story is all it has.

My interest in Left 4 Dead single player is because I have an interest in procedurally generated worlds and content in the world.  Yes, it is better multiplayer, but that aspect does pique my interest about L4D (both of them).

Yeah, that aspect of L4D interests me too.  And if they continue to have offline with bots I'd be curious to see them expand the experience to mix say the story driven SP of Half Life with the procedural generation of enemies and combat - plus perhaps even procedural story experiences.

I think this could be a great way for videogames which do chose to have a series go at story with film and literature.  It's not so much the more basic multiple ending approach as different content and exposition based on progress of the player.

Silent Hill 2 for example interests me because it's multiple endings derive very neatly from player choices throughout the game with some character depth, and I'd love to see Valve expand this.  Not with L4D but with a new IP designed to combine SP with the procedural experience.