Naughty Dog wants to change the industry by rising above the 'idiot plot'

[JinxRake]

Mnementh said:

JinxRake said:

 

I'm afraid I disagree on that bit, quite severely even.

I mentioned Morrowind in my previous post. That game has a great story. It is a fantasy adventure set against the backdrop of one of the most beautiful fantasy worlds ever conceived, with some of the best world building available in almost any format. Its story is absolutely fantastic and it invites to exploration and discovery. It won't force feed you anything, but it does rival some of the best works out there. I am as ready to believe in the island of Morrowind as I am to believe in the Discworld, the Malazan Empire, Westeros or even in New Crobuzon.

Same would go for Final Fantasy IX for example, for Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Legacy of Kain...heck, even Ace Combat 5 I'd log in there without shame.

I don't believe games are behind books or films in regards to telling a compelling story, but rather that games have a completely different way of getting the story across to the people playing. The scale of events is generally different between mediums. While Starcraft can have a great story about the three races as they try to survive and overcome their difficulties, the Starcraft books can concentrate on grounded characters and the horrors of the Zerg and their invasion, giving a ground level eye witness view of the whole thing.

Which is superior? Neither, as they both get a message across, each in its way or form.

 

As I said and I repeat: most of our entertainment is made up of pure crap that needs to be explored for the gems that may hide.

There will be games with great stories and some people will not even know they have been told a great story because the cues are not as clear as some would require.

There will be books with great action and great worlds presented, and some will not know that either because there will be no pictures.

Such is the way of entertainment. You can't please everyone.

I agree that different forms have their weaknesses and strengths. Good books have better stories than good movies, but movies are easier to consume and are more impressive with pictures. Games have their strengths too, but on the side of interactivity, not on the story-side. Which is the one we are talking about. Again, try my test: make a playthrough video of a great game, unedited. and show it in a cinema together with a great movie from the same genre. Which one will the audience like more?

This is fast becoming a discussion of its own. Your test is flawed by the fact that you are pitting together two different mediums of which only one will be able to perform on its strengths.

If I put up Se7en versus Heavy Rain, I'm pretty certain not many will be impressed by the later. The scene where you saw off one finger, an action at a time, will be that much less dramatic simply because the audience is not part of it. Make the audience play the whole thing and have them do the deed and you may get very different reactions.

My girlfriend is a squeamish person. She doesn't like horror films or gore that much, but she loved Heavy Rain to bits. Having asked her what she felt was more impressive, the head bit from Se7en or the finger bit from Heavy Rain, she always goes for the later.

 

It's apples to oranges here. You said we talk about stories and not interactivity...but interactivity determines story impact in games. I've had friends sit down and play Flower on my PS3 after they had watched me do the first levels. Their reactions quickly went from "Yeah, it looks pretty" to silent concentration as they played, to feelings of loss in the 5th level and a grand feeling of joy and elation as they reached the city. I've watched my friends go through curiosity of the first few levels, to smiles as they rode the wind, to a brooding concentration as they navigated the electric lines and finally to wide smiles as they brought the city back to life.

Watching something and being part of it are two different things. That's why games cannot be measured on the same scale as films or books. They are not films, nor books, but their own thing with their own set of tools by which to engage the audience.

 

So I can't agree to your test because by taking away a game's interactivity - be it wide areas of exploration or simple quick time events -, you defang it and force it to be something it is not.