Games don't need stories.

[Reasonable]

Pyro as Bill said:

Reasonable said:

Pyro as Bill said:

Soriku said:

Pyro as Bill said:
Replayability > Music >>>>>> Graphics >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Story

Who plays a game for it's story? The stories in games make horror B-movies look like Oscar nominees.

Are you sure it's because you haven't played a game with a good story?

For me story is important, but not always absolutely necessary. A good story helps me gets sucked into the game, the characters, the music that goes along with it, and the gameplay (because beating the crap out of characters that are dicks in story is nice when you have good gameplay to go along.)

I don't play RPGs so that may be why.

Half Life 2, kill the enemies, save the world. Zelda OoT-TP, kill Ganon, save Hyrule. I played Prototype earlier this year, horrible story. In some cases the heavy focus on story hurts the game, Prototype. In others it seemed to help a mediocre game, Bioshock. Advance Wars, I hated all the story crap but it's still a great game.

My most played game this gen has no background story whatsoever, Team Fortress 2. I still don't know why Red team fights Blu so much and I don't care.

TF2, Portal, any fighting game, NSMB, Mario Kart, Wii Sports, Braid, Plants v Zombies, Left 4 Dead, World of Goo, the list is endless.

Games do not need stories. Text adventures and their modern day CGI versions do.

Half Life 2 has a pretty clever story, but Valve took the approach where its up to you whether you dig into it or not, which I think is the best way to go.  However, just because you chose to play the game without bothering with any of the deeper backstory doesn't change the fact it is there.

TF2 is a pure multiplayer game - of course it has no story!  I play it lots and love its zany humour, but that's exactly the kind of game that doesn't really have nor need a story - it has a carefully implied context to give it a setting, but that's not a story.

Some games are definately going to need stories, but of course many, perhaps most, don't.  Take Uncharted 2 - it simply wouldn't work without its Saturday morning adventure serial story and context, it's characters are too well presented and it's world too realistic to work without a narrative.  Bioshock whether you like the story or not certainly wouldn't work without one IMHO.  Again, the setting is too rich.  There needs to be a story.  I thought the story in Bioshock was weak in the end, although the game started well, but that's the problem - those games that do need stories all too often have weak ones.

Basically, anything like Fallout 3, Uncharted, etc. do need stories.  Those are games.  You're last line is in conflict with itself. You can't say games don't need stories but text adventures do.  Text adventures are games - ergo some games need stories.

 

I know the games have stories, I'm saying games don't need them. Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat had stories but neither needed them. I paid little to no attention to the stories in Zelda and HL but I still found them to be great games. The poster above says they played Fallout 3 whilst ignoring the plot.

By text adventures I mean the books from years ago that had 'turn to page 46 to take path A or turn to page 48 to take path B'. I never considered these books to be games and I don't consider their modern equivalents to be games either.

Valve does story well. It never/rarely gets in the way of the game.

Music/sound improves a game infinitely moreso than any B C-movie plot and we have over 30 years worth of top selling arcade games to show for it and not one successful game story to movie transition (except Super Mario Bros of course).

Sorry, but you can't just decide adventure games aren't games.  They are, period.  They may not appeal to you, but an adventure videogame, even one without graphic such as an old text based adventure game are games.

As for the other we'll need to disagree.  As I say Uncharted 2, Fallout 3, etc. I believe for the majority would be weaker without their stories, certainly that would appear to the general feeling from reviews and gamers in general.  Uncharted 2 has become one of the best critically recieved games and I don't see the majority of those who enjoy it arguing it would be better without the story that drives the SP element of the game - and that for me is the point.  Another example would be ICO, which simply wouldn't be the experience it is without the story.

There are today many, many different types of videogame, few appeal to everyone, but some by their very nature clearly need a story.  I really don't see any post in this thread refuting that.  You can state games don't need a story, but I then ask how can you ignore the games that clearly do?  Silent Hill 2 simply wouldn't work as well without the story.  In short, there are a small but definite number of games that are better for having their story, something accepted by critics and those who enjoy those games - I think you'll struggle to find someone who genuinely enjoyed Silent Hill 2 who wishes it didn't have the story and feels the game would have been better without one.  I know for a fact you have no chance of proving the majority of those who enjoyed that game wish it didn't have its story.  So to be blunt, so long as you have games which have a story, and which the majority of those who enjoy that type of game want the story, then you have definitive proof that some games do need a story.

A final example - one poster said he ignored the plot of Fallout 3 - to be honest, big deal.  I guarantee you the majority of those who really enjoyed the game didn't.  The story is a central element of a game like Fallout 3.  There will always be a few in the minority, but its the majority view that matters, and so far as I can see the evidence is that the majority of those who played Fallout 3 want an RPG with quests and tasks linked by by a story that progresses.

One thing I do agree with you on is that if the videogame is good, the story will never get in the way of the game.  But that's a different topic.