Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

I think this does vary. Some game studios put a lot of effort into the story and make a game that is essentially a rather mediocre interactive movie (Wing Commander 3, anyone? Or... if I'm being controversial, some of the more recent incarnations of the Final Fantasy series).

Others put so much effort into the engine that a coherent narrative or believable dialogue is a completely optional extra (such was my experience of the very popular Oblivion).

I don't think its a case of one over the other. I think Gears of War actually did quite a good job of balancing a graphically detailed world with a compelling storyline, for example. It's just a question of the priorities of each studio and each game as it comes.

I Feel that games should allow people to inter-act with each other more. If you play a game you want to get lost in the world of it, otherwise you end up bored, or you feel once you have completed it that you can't be bothered to play it twice. If games console such as X-box made use of their online facilitys to make games such as roleplays and things where you can build a character like many online games such as runescape. Then their money would sky rocket.
I think it is in the interest of games companies to start doing this!

I agree that gamers shouldn't feel that they are trapped on a set and instead are given that feeling of freedom and immersion that comes with a believable (but not necessarily a realistic) world.

However, I find that the most compelling games allow you to tell your own story rather than turn the digital pages of a developers. I've played through many stories... once, but when I can create my own I keep coming back.

Just give a player a consistent universe with some constraints rules/physics etc) and some examples to play with (i.e. vague goals or missions) and watch them play for hours

I totally agree with with the writer of this article, not nearly enough effort is put into plot and characters. I myslef have preordered a PS3 and Elder Scrolls IV:Oblivion. My experience in the past, particulally with the fantasy RPG genre, is that the main features are graphics,graphics and maybe a bit of unconvincing characters and plot thrown in at the end.
I for one think that it is time for the developers to think about what matters more- how many gigabytes of pretty graphics they can squeeze in, or how long the story wants you to keep playing.

In my experience, another game that only boasts fancy graphics is nothing distinctive. A good story to follow is what is needed to captivate the gamer that was played through many shootouts and punch-ups. Max Payne, XIII and Final Fantasy not only grabbed my attention, but grasped it firmly too. Serious Sam, on the other hand, quickly became a new frisbee as it proved twist free.
No new story means another department better be really loaded if a game's going to win me over.

some of the best games i have ever played revolved around a compelling story line e.g. knights of the old republic and deus ex.
but sometimes we don't need all that much story line to enjoy a game, half life one was more fun than half life two (this is not to diminish hl2) atmosphere can be killed by too much unnatural conversation.

i thinks games of late have neglected story completely. this may be due to the increasing competition in the marketplace coinciding the vast majority of games ive bought over the last few years have lacked both longivity and solid story. such games as final fantasy,halo and MGS explore some complex themes but these games are few and far between.
its very hard to market a game on the strength of its story by conventional mends but most games that accomplise this like the examples above do produce a cultist hardcore following and it turn are massive revenue generators. this for one should be motivation for game studios to put more effort into this much overlooked area.

Deus Ex was one of the finest games I've ever played, it's a pity that the sequel was so stripped down for consoles. Half-life 2 is an incredibly linear game, normally something that I would find frustrating, however, the storyline, characters, and interactivity (at least, with objects) is so good that I think it's brilliant.

Great story and interactivity are the way to go, games should not have to dumb down or be stripped down, esp. not for consoles.

As an avid film buff and film maker the storylines and in particular the dialogue in games makes me want to wretch. Until recently there have been limitations in the genre in that facial expressions were not accurate enough to portray subtle emotions but the latest consoles have no excuse. Maybe we'll see an improvement as developers get used to working with the latest technology and start stretching what they can portray with a look or camera angle rather than cheesy dialogue. The phrase "Show not tell" should be tattooed on every game designers head.

Deus-Ex was my first video game ever. Sadly...
Sadly beacause all the other games i bought after it sucked. The only reason i power up my ps2 once in a while is for Deus-Ex. The other 12 or so: wast of money, no fun, no excitment, boring. So why is Deus-ex so different: exactly what this blog pointed out. A truly great, complex, exciting story- many worlds to discover, too many for the first rounds, and even after the 10th round you can still find new ways-action when you are up to it, a detective an other moment- so much love and dedication to details- so consitant the details, the story, the charicters etc YOU ARE pulled into a new word that starts soon to be you own. Deus-ex whas too good, thats exactly why they dont want to make these good games anymore; people play them too often too long, and don't buy enough other games. Stupid thinking of cource. I would have payed the double price for Deus-ex whitout a blink.
M

I recently played two very old RPG, Starflight (1986) and Ultima VI (1990) using the DOSBox emulator. For all the primitiveness of the graphics, the games were very engrossing because of the excellent story and gameplay.

I think there are some who wouldn't mind less-than-cutting edge graphics, if there is a good story and gameplay.

Warren Spector's identified the single most important - and yet single most neglected - way to REALLY improve game quality.

It's also the SIMPLEST and - until the eventual arising of Alan Moore and Grant Morrison God-like geniuses in the industry - the CHEAPEST.

A simple example: take any shoot'em up, but instead of merely making the game a straightforward matter of kill or be killed, use the narrative structure to build-up an authentic emotionally charged atmosphere which eventually forces players into having to choose between which of their buddies in the game they must blow-away.

No amount of slick billion dollar technical improvements'd ever increase the sense of difficulty such a scenario'd undoubtedly have in real life - yet the more and more successfully the game managed to convey a convincing and compelling sense of the buddies as people, the more and more the tension in the game'd ratchet up and, therefore, the more and more difficult the game'd become.

Chuck in details like if one beloved buddy doesn't survive to make the final payment on his sweet ol' gra'ma's cottage he won't be able to save her from the fate of walking the streets the bank's got in store for her, and another beloved buddy's the only person who can provide the bone marrow donation that'll save Jojo jnr. the sole remaining pedigree budgie left to save the buddy's family fortune after his ex. did a Lorraine Bobbit to Jojo snr.'s testicles, and the players' nerves'll be so bad they'll be swallowing Valium by the van load, (unless they're my 11 year old daughter, who wouldn't have the slightest compunction in wasting any of them!).

It really has to be a balance of the two. A compelling story line that entices you back to the game. Along with a solid technical backdrop that can suprise you. The final fantasy series is a good example: with a central story (quest)that keeps you playing but with the opportunity to explore off the beaten path and taken on other challenges. RPGs in general tend to manage this very well (though there are always a exceptions). Other genres can struggle I think. For example the metal gear solid games, where the sole aim has been to make the player feel like they are in a film. The result is sitting through hours of dialogue with little in the way of actual interaction. And first person shooters where gameplay can easily become repetitive. A good story can draw out a emotional responce from the player and ultimately be very rewarding. If you don't believe me go play some of the old school games like chrono trigger or fallout.

I agree that Deus Ex was a work of art as far as story telling and gameplay goes. It's still great now which shows that graphics aren't everything.The best games which have a good storyline are the Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic series, the number of directions you can follow, and the number of ways of forming your character are endless. Games with a good story are much more enjoyable

Warren Spector makes some very good points, but one that I disagree on is the whole Vin Diesel thing. Fair enough, playing as a movie character on the straight and narrow path and doing the things THEY want to probably proves a bit restrictive in the end up, but the opposite is also a path to disaster ( but hey, at least you're allowed to choose which path you take! Sorry.).
Someone mentioned earlier Oblivion, and I think this is a great example of what I want to say. Oblivion was hyped to be the most open ended, free game ever released. You could do what you wanted, boost whatever stats took your fancy, shape your character's face down to the smallest detail - but the ironic thing is, if there was anything missing from that game it was CHARACTER. Somehow when you remove all restrictions and set templates for character, it really does lose a lot of it's individuality and identity. For example, wouldn't you prefer to choose to play the character which you would RELATE to most, rather than create a character where you would be basing it on your own self, which basically removes the entire point of a fantasy videogame?
Apart from that, with so much customisation and differentiation on offer, developers are really just making it very difficult for themselves to integrate your character into the otherwise unremarkable environment.
Personally, I think the most recent videogame to strike a great balance between individuality and integration is probably Final Fantasy XII. The story line is expansive and gripping, the production values are top notch and the main characters are varied and developed. However, at the same time, you also have control over how the characters perform during the game and you could lead them anywhere else in the world you want whilst still feeling compelled to see their story through. I think this is the kind of balance we should be seeing more often. Give us an epic on a plate, but leave a little bit to the imagination of the player; kind of like reading a book.

It is true that games are not very good at story-telling. But let us be patient.
Part of the problem is a lack of understanding how to reduce complex feelings to state machines.
But a larger part is simple immaturity. It took some time after the invention of the forte-piano before people stopped writing pieces to show off the forte and piano, and started writing music appropriate to the new instrument. iMax cinema directors still haven't outgrown the temptation to show off the technology instead of telling a story. Games will get there, but it may take a generation. (Alas, though not around for the invention of the piano, I'm not likely to make it the time needed to solve this problem.)

I agree with most of the comments presented here. Many games have been mentioned that are absolute classics, Deus Ex, Knights of the Old Republic, Ultima VI (indeed all of Richard Garriots series). Others I might mention as System Shock one and two, which also benifited from Warrens hand.

But I'd like to present another possibility. Player created and run stories. SInce I started playing Online RPGs I find it almost imposible to go back to single player games (with the exception of Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔworld II, another classic from a quality line of games).

The games I played are Neverwinter Nights and Star Wars Gallaxies. In the former whole world creation can be done by players, for players. Nothing beats knowing other players are having a total blast, playing a story you are writing and controling, but making them the central charaters, and changing the storys based on there actions. Now I am working in a team developing a world for Neverwinter Nights II.

In Gallaxies SOE the producers ruined the game by making it fit for consoles. But for two years I played with a community of players who made the game with there own stories. 15 or so or us from all across europe still meet up year in year out in real life because of the frendiships we forged. The past two years to was in Germany, this year they are comming to England.

This kind of player driver and created story telling and creation and the very real social aspests (lost the steriotype of games being sad and loney, it could not be further from the truth), this is the way forward.

Andy G

If a game has a great story (which can be a story the player creates for themselves just by playing the game) in which the player is directly involved (not just as a backdrop to a generic level or mission), it's likely to be a great game. If it doesn't have a great story then it can be a great game for other reasons, but it will never be quite as unforgettable, as vivid as a game with a proper story. It will also date far better. There's good reasons to play Grim Fandango (an adventure game) in 2007 but certainly not Quake.

To be quite honest, when looking for a game with fantastic storyline who picks up the lastest FSP? I mean seriously we all have times when mindlessly slaughtering generic enemies appeals, but you're never going to satisfy the need for a storyline there! If you want storyline buy an RPG, it's the whole point of the genre, and yes lots of studios go off the rails and produce something more worthy of a litter tray than a console/PC, but this is to be expected in the evolution of any form of art/entertainment. I remember looking for months to find "the secret of mana" for my snes back in the day, and believe me it was well worth it, but a few years later when the same studio produced a sequel of sorts (so terrible i've actually repressed the name of it sorry) i was mortified that anyone could go from a fantastic RPG (mulltiplayer as well) to a rock-bottom barrel-scraping sequel so quickly. This however did not put me off buying games of any sort. Nor did i spend hours complaining at everyone who would listen (maybe a slight fib there lol). The point i'm trying to get across is if you look hard enough you will find excellent examples of every genre, more than enough to keep you gaming for the rest of time (or at least until something else comes out).
Chris

Hi Darren,

I have only managed to see glimpses of Maggie Philbin on Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Breakfast showing some highlights of the Siggraph 2007 exhibition.

I was wondering if you were going to write an overview of what was on show all week and sum up the highlights etc, so that this is in one, easy to read document? I am after finding good links which give an overall synopsis of Siggraph 2007, but the stuff on the actual Siggraph site only seems to provide the details of each product/idea. Any thoughts or links would be appreciated.

Many thanks

Rachel Hall