I could of gone with "movie-like" experience, but I know not all games are heavily multimedia.  What I will say is "production value" is what is normally done in movies in order to improve their quality to make the experience better.  So,  what I was focusing on is the elements in telling a story, the storytelling.  And I am of the belief increased production value helps with the storytelling process.

Ok, looks like my reply got hosed by a databse error.  I was trying to say that I found the game design decisions in Brutal Legend totally undermined the storytelling side.  I wanted to like Brutal, but found the required rythmn game minigame during the RTS action play ended up making it not a fun experience and a game I got rid of.  I so much wanted to like it.   I still have Psychonauts though.

Well it depends on the gamer imo. for me, i love to play a game for a compelling story, FF, MGS, Prince of Persia, Assassins Creed 1, and the action just makes it more worthwhile.

but generally i think a lot of gamers these days dont appreciate that type of game, i think a lot of gamers are teenagers or kids, who just like to play GTA for action, sandbox, or MW2 for playing with their friends. so imo it wouldnt make a difference if well paid actors, ie Liam Neeson had longer parts in games. people just dont play them for that, they would skip the dialogue and they would skip the cutscenes.

but you dont need to hire household names for voice acting, theres some phenominal actors out there that do a great job. the best example i think of is Mass Effect 2, imo this game will win igns game of the year. but its only sold what 2mil units in 11 months, so its a diachotomy of providing a phenominal peice of fiction that will appeal to niche market, or making some mindless shooter that will generate millions in revenue. thats what i think anyway.

I'm curious but is the person who made this thread work for a game company, maybe even work for Ninja Theory. the reason i ask is because appantly on the Mass Effect 2 PS3 thread had a comment by someone who said they were the producer for ME2. its just this thread seems to be asking questions a person from ninja theory would ask after the dissappointing sales of Enslaved. (no offense).

In cases where the game is more entertainment with the focus on story. Then Storytelling can be really important. Even if the story is bad the pacing and draw of the next scene can keep players playing. FF7 had a good pace and a bad story. In FPS, Platformers, GTA, Creed... the story is a non factor. The story is only a glue that leads players on a series of activities. It's the fun of the activities that makes the game. However if you just drop people into the game with little instruction then.... oh hell there's Minecraft that's currently at over a million users and half a million sales.

Here it is simple terms
Software Entertainment requires masterful Story telling even if the story sucks.
Software Games require good game play even if there is no story at all.

The catch is that a Software Game can dip into the market of Software Entertainment with a story and try to increase the sales.

I would say.... perception of having a good story is important.

Good story should increase sales slightly through word of mouth and positive review scores in the long term but long term sales are diluted by used game sales.

Dragon Age: Origins has huge replayability due to story telling. Each of the origins stories are unique and amazing. There are some quirky things that pop up for playing different races and there are a slew of choices to make through-out. It's worthwhile to see how things turn out each way.

I think some games that sell well also have good stories, but their good stories is not what made the game sell well.

For game sales and popularity it really depends on the game, genre and what it's trying to acheive. A popular game doesn't need good storytelling to sell well and become popular as shown by Mario. A story can help a game to gain more popularity. For instance, the multiplayer aspect of Call of Duty is what brings in the massive sales, but the single player aids that. The campaign in CoD4 was widely appreciated in reviews and by customers due to the shocking moments. Half-Life and Half-Life 2 wouldn't have become as popular as they did if it wasn't for the way they innovated FPS storytelling.

For longevity, it all depends on how the game tells the story and how it incorporates replay value. Most RPGs have a lot of replay value as you can experience different outcomes and undertake smaller side stories. With shorter and more linear games (Uncharted, Enslaved), the replay value is dependent entirely on the gamer. Some will only play through once, whilst others will play through multiple times because they love the story.

I think it all comes down to the game. No, good story isn't a requirement for selling well, but I think looking at the best selling games of all time undermines the success of games centered on story. Games built around story can still do really well, and although they don't do Mario Kart Wii numbers, games like Fallout 3, God of War III and Batman: Arkham Asylum have done really well this generation.

It all depends on the game, and how it is marketed. I replayed Arkham Asylum a few months ago, and it's still a wicked awesome campaign to play through. So much in fact, that of the all the SP campaigns I have access to right now, I can see myself replaying this game the most. For now anyway.

But the reason why B:AA succeeds so well at being a good replayable single player game, is because it mixes great gameplay with great story telling. A game like Uncharted 2 relies more heavily on its story telling than its gameplay to provide a great SP, and so once you've played it through once, you've seen pretty much all there is to see, because the game is so linear (Naughty Dog have of course added longevity to the game with multiplayer), but B:AA leaves the gameplay more open to the player. You feel like you are the god damn Batman, and it's fun beating up these thugs, messing with them with the stealth play and trying out new ways of getting the job done.

I think games like B:AA are the way to go if you want to have longevity in your singleplayer campaign. It's got the right mix of great, open gameplay and great story telling, and that structure I think is what has earned the game all the fans it's got.

A game like Enslaved is very focused on delivering a great story, and guides the player too much. It's like Uncharted 2, in that once you've gone through the game, you've seen all there is to see, and if you come back to replay it, you'll be replaying the exact same, very straight forward game. You can't make the experience your own, because the player is not connected enough to the experience. Enslaved is still a good game, but it's just so extremely linear, that it's hard to feel like you as the player, are having an impact on the events unfolding before you. Uncharted 2 was certainly a better example of how you can draw the player into a campaign like this, not to mention that it is way more polished.

EDIT: Just to mention it, Heavy Rain is another game that seeks to be more replayable and draw the player in, though it does by intertwining the story and gameplay in a new way (even if it resembles old adventure games a lot in structure), and has exceeded expectations wildly. It's a model that needs to be polished, but it's one I think is really, really exciting, and I want to see it thrive alongside games of the Arkham Asylum structure.

In my case, nope.  If anyone can get me a job, preferably in the gaming industry, I would be open for it.  As of now, I am job hunting.  I am just a person thinking about game sales, and how much the videogame industry wants to pattern itself after the movie industry, and trying to be more like a movie.  In my case, regarding Enslaved, it didn't really grab my interest, so I passed on it.  I look for games based up what goes into making the game side good above other things.  This being said, I am a fan of the Uncharted series, and if they can get they story elements right, including characters with lines right, and also the story (if any) it works for me.  In my case, even an intro done right will hook me.  Besides Borderlands being fun (loot run with randomized weapons in an FPS) and arguably my top game this generation, the intro video to the game, playing "No Rest for the Wicked" with the Hunter playing with the knife, got me hooked.  And Claptrap is memorable also.  I also say this saying I almost totally played Borderlands single player.  Still have it for multiplayer down the road.

I think the story is important but it depends on what kind of game it is.