I think that you're missing something here. The stories in the games can be good. They can be awesome. But they never actually work.  Metal Gear might have a good story. But that story would work better if it was completely detatched from the game. The second you get to control Snake, all suspension of dispelief is shattered and the story falls flat.

Why this happens is explained in the article.

But that's exactly my point. JRPGs (or at least good JRPGs) have amazing stories. Of course, they are non-interactive, but I've felt more attached to JRPG characters and their actions that I've been to characters of every other genre. And if the JRPG is good, the decisions the character makes will not feel out of place, so I won't be thinking "ooh, I wanted to do other thing instead of that". Heck, the main reason I play JRPGs is for their story, of course gameplay is important too, but when I play a JRPG it's to see see the story develop and grow on me, surprise me and move me.

Yes, and this is why games aren't games in the sense of Pacman, Pong, Space Invaders but they've now become movies.  Metal Gear Solid is probably the best example of this. The potential in storytelling that games have is being wasted games that , yet again, try too hard to be novels and movies.  Probably the biggest reason JRPG fans like some JRPG's over other JRPG's is that relate more with the characters rather than the gameplay mechanic.  This is why JRPG's often fail to be games at all.

I do not agree with the article, although I can see why he says what he says. I personally thought the story of MGS was one of the most fascinating ever told. I don't care if Snake makes decisions without me. Me controlling every one of his actions would kill any possibility of sequels.

With stand alone games, it's more than good. In fact, I love it when the game gives you the opportunity to change the story and the world. Oblivion did this to a point, but it could have been better. Fable 2 seems the best at doing this.

However, when you're in part of a series, you need either a fixed storyline or several storylines, but only one is 'canon' or 'correct'. And I think that would be quite annoying- being told you played the game the wrong way. It's your game. There is no wrong way. And of course, a fixed story is preferable.

Moving on to the quote, I completely disagree with the bolded statement. They are all gaming consoles. All three of them put more focus on gaming than anything else. If you ask me, the Wii is the only one which isn't a gaming console. But that's my opinion and that's off topic.

And of course gameplay is the most important. However, this is followed by graphics, then replay value, then story. At least, in my opinion.

RPG's are like books, with books they emerge you into the story yet all your doing is following the worlds set out on the pages, RPG's are generally the same your just following the script laid out. Personally I like it.
Fable one, GTA3 both had your character not talking and because of that i never felt any real bond or personality from the character itself. in the end even without talking you still following the script set out as a mute.

I don't see the difference really between cutting to a cut screen being told what to do, and just standing there in game being told what too do.

if u want a good story then why should there be so much choice especially if its a jrpg, IMO a good jrpg has a set story much like a great novel.

The game play is leveling up, the ease at which u progress through the story. gameplay should imitate the hardships, the emotions the feelings of that character as it progresses through the story. That way the player gets to feel more attatched and immersed with the role of that character in the STORY/GAME.

The above doesnt only apply to JRPGs mind you. MGS4 is a great example of a balanced gameplay/story telling game. The gameplay compliments its story and vise versa.

Im not a fan of rpgs like Oblivion, simply because there are too many distractions to achieve the goal of telling the main story. ive only played about 3 hours worth but. there are way too many side quests. If i wanted a game like that id go back to playing FFXI. but single player games. keep the story as is and dont shovel too many unneccessary stuff.

I loved FFX because the main story good. it had little side quests that, you could leave out or u may want to do but it doesnt make the game any less if u dont do them.

Why are people expected to pay up to $60 for books?

And it never once occured to you to immerse yourself in the story, to fill in the dialogue with that of your own choosing, as you're meant to do in mute-protagonist stories?

I pity you. I pity the atrophied process that passes for imagination in today's gaming public. People have been immersing themselves in games since the NES days, yet modern gamers can't do it for anything without the crutches of photorealism and voice acting.

Ah, but whats the difference between my charater saying" ok, i'll go run along now and kill the big bad thing" and him saying nothing..

I'll still get pushed fowards to killthe big bad, it make no difference if i fill in the convo with my thought of telling the person to take a jump or gun ho.

Gameplay and storys no matter which way are almost impossible to tell a sotry though, because it's visual, text and sound by which we get the story.

If your saying Games just souldn't tell storys, then you just end up with MMORPG's >.>

That was interesting read, and he does make some good points. This being the one I agree with most.

"You know who you are, you know your outlook and you know how you react to things. As soon as the character you're bonded with opens their mouth in a cut-scene and reacts differently to how you yourself would, the illusion of oneness is broken."

That's probably the biggest problem with this back and forth between being a passive and an interactive linear entertainment, if one element doesn't jive with the player, it tends to fall apart for that player. If you like the story, but not the gameplay, you're going to have a hard time suffering through one or the other and vice versa. I find it very annoying and hard to even be motivated when a character I’m controlling has to do something for someone I’ve already figured is going to betray me soon.

The flipside is when someone likes BOTH passive and interactive elements and they work well together it’s a big plus for that person. That’s the reason why a lot of cinematic games follow familiar set-ups of moody protagonists with chips on their shoulders who have to unravel a sinister plot, defeat an evil megalomaniac, or both. It’s a proven format that sells well with a lot traditional gamers.

It my also be why a lot of RPG’s aren’t doing so well this generation, their format isn’t very appealing to the current mainstream market. Pokemon is still selling gangbusters probably in part because it never emphasizes its mostly non-existent story.

All though I agree that games in general aren’t good as a story telling medium, it’s still good entertainment for a lot of people. I’m guilty of it, I love No More Heroes and Okami even though they follow the same flawed passive/interactive swap format.

What kills me is this guy goes on to lavish Half-Life 2 and Portal at the end of this article about how they’re “true videogame storytelling” when both of those games follow similar less-flawed set-up. The story in both games is still passive entertainment. They’re both still linear plotlines that you can’t change or influence. Telling their stories through conversations and more subtle elements is certainly better from a gameplay perspective. Since it does allow you to ignore elements of the story you’re not interested in.

Still locking the player in a room with characters progressing the storyline serve the same purpose as a cutscene. It’s something the creators refuse to let you miss; you can just do more to entertain yourself since you still technically have control. Having silent protagonists means there’s less of a chance they’ll react in a way contrary to the player. It’s all simply more organic approaches to the same concept.