[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/games/ - Games

Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon


Let's talk about stories in video games.
One thing I find fascinating with online alt-right anti-sjw gaming youtubers(Griffingaming and all the Leafyclones that are still fucking alive) is that they prefer to take vague definitions(TLoU2 having a "bad" story) and spearhead them to no end.
I haven't played TLoU1 and I'm not planning to, but I think having played this game, I am qualified for talking about the story. My biggest gripe with the story is that they changed focus and perspective. I'm rarely ever a fan of changing perspective in a character-driven story. Take GTA V for example. It's an action-driven game rather than character, and you can see that the incohesive story focus doesn't really hurt the game much. Compare that to GTA IV, which was a much more character focused game.
One thing that I believe gamers don't understand when discussing story in Hideo games is how stories work in general. In the contemporary age, and with more creative writings, you can see how the importance of having a plot, having characters is fading and giving its place to more storytelling through language. Now of course we don't really know what this "language" of video games is for certain because of how little literature there is on video games, but drawing parallels, it roughly translates into gameplay and visual elements of the game. Sure, a plot and character-driven story is more accessible and probably a lot of people would prefer that to more experimental storytelling, but it's not like we didn't have games with unconventional methods of storytelling in the past.
Minecraft, the epicest game of all time doesn't have a real plot. Sure, it does have a supposed "end", but that doesn't make for a plot. Ask all gamers if minecraft has a story and they'll say no; but it does have characters, a setting, and most importantly "storytelling".
The language of storytelling in videogames translates into gameplay and visual elements. Take Doom for example. The plot is a simple demon invasion, but the methods of storytelling is similar to that of the Grindhouse genre. Take Cruelty Squad, one of my favorite games, for example. It does have a plot, for sure, but the thing that really stands out is the storytelling.
The gameplay contributes a lot to the storytelling. Different gameplay modes allow for different forms of storytellings. Why are most story-focused games RPGs? Why aren't they Multiplayer Battleroyale games? Because RPGs allow for a more heavily focused narrative and character development than say, fighting games. Different gameplay mechanics also make for different storytelling. Compare Skyrim, an ARPG, to Elden Ring(the second most epicest game), an ARPG. You can see how certain gameplay mechanics change the storytelling in these two videogames and allow for different flows, narratives, and stories altogether.
Visuals are also really important in videogames, but I'm not going to talk much about it since there is an entire art form dedicated to visual arts and its language is pretty much understood at this moment.
I'd really love to see more discourse about the language of videogames and storytelling in videogames.
Back to what I was talking about in the beginning, sure. TLoU2's overall focus and plot may be lacking in some areas, but the storytelling is top notch. It has one of the best stories and narratives I've ever encountered in a videogame and likely am to encounter. Seems like gamers are just mad that the lesbo spared the mommy who killed the daddyman.


File: 1660158468919.jpg (103.7 KB, 527x529, my man ahti.jpg)

Storytelling is the most important thing in a video game. Like, angry birds is just slingshooting a ball into an structure. But the silly characters bring them to life. Green fat ass sphere ass pigs and birds. And the fucking pigs are building structures. And the fucking birds instead of flying are slingshooting themselves.

TLOU2 has weak gameplay and an amazing story that makes people finish it. In fact I think it's one of the most finished games on Playstation (not 100%, but seeing the ending I mean). I played Control some time ago, and the graphics are awesome, the setting is great and the gameplay is fun as hell. But the story is atrocious. There is only one good character >pic , the pace is horrendous and, I did in fact finished although I took longer it but it was the worst ending I've seen ever. No climax, no development, no nothing.

On another note, is there a name for the storytelling technique of "giving" a prize to the viewer in the end? Like a powerful image that only can be understand after seeing the movie/playing the game. Or a good song at the end scene. I doesn't have to be a good thing either.


>storytelling is the most important thing in a videogame
Yeah I agree, and I'd argue that in order to better understand the language of storytelling in videogames, which is a fairly contemporary art, we should study them better and analyse them better, which would go against the majority anti-intellectual gamer base.
>Angry Birds
I remember downloading that game on my tablet and my father absolutely being obssessed with it. He would play that game for fucking hours. And it's also one of the good examples of a game with a story, but not a real plot. Also Angry Birds Starwars 2 fucking rules.
>storytelling technique of giving a prize to the viewer in the end
I think it's just called a reward system, or simply just a final reward. Some of them come in form of twists and are probably the most memorable. Bioshock 1 comes to mind. Or that Metroid reveal. Probably my favorite final reward of all media is Sharp Object's final scene that I'm not gonna spoil but it's fucking executed beautifully.


The most important stories in games are the stories constructed by the players themselves through play. A lot of pretentious cinema hacks who couldn't make it writing in the motion picture industry don't understand this, and they come to the erroneous conclusion that story is something you're supposed to regurgitate onto the player as a "reward". Their games suffer from it and they often end up creating "content munchers". A content muncher is a game that focuses on delivering a series of arbitrary rewards to the player–watch a cutscene, see a scripted event, fight a climactic set-piece boss battle, etc.–in lieu of making the gameplay itself interesting. The gameplay just becomes an obstacle to be overcome in order to get to the next piece of actual content, rather than something done for its own sake. It's akin to a book with its pages stuck together: you want to read it, but to do so you need to unstick the pages, a boring and aggravating task that serves no purpose but to delay your engagement with the content. The best implementation of story in games is that which contains just enough exposition to facilitate the player directing their own story through compelling game mechanics.


This, it's unnecessarily limiting for the genre to focus too much on storytelling and narrative, when a broader view of games as self-directed work (or general "play") is more fitting. It's a mistake to try to cram a movie script into a video game when they're suited for very different experiences; Tetris and Sokoban have no story whatsoever but they're still enjoyable games, whereas watching recorded games unfold on a movie screen would be boring as hell. That isn't to say linear, heavily story-driven games aren't worthwhile, but the horizon of possibility is much larger than that and the focus should be on gameplay first and foremost.


I was so infuriated by OP pretending like TLOU2 had a good story that I typed up a 3000 word rebuttal before deleting it because I realized no one would read it.
Fuck you OP the story was shit.


Idk how to feel about it personally
I liked the fact that they took multiple perspectives and motives for the characters I just wanna understand what the overall message a core component of any story was considering it seems like the writers spent so much on world and character building they forgot to base all of that shit around a central idea which is why the story feels meaningless to me yet simultaneously interesting


>thread topic
I think this all stems from how the industry works tbh. Video games originated as purely gameplay with story amounting to giving visuals and sounds to explain what the different game elements are. Over time better technology allowed more complex things and you started having the "story" injected in the form of text logs, cutscenes, etc. You started seeing some overlap with other industries, with games hiring writers, actors, etc who had worked on TV or something. Their contribution to the game development tended to be fairly separated from the "game" part of the game. This was preserved for a long time because it's a lot easier to keep them separate.

Developing game mechanics is more of an iterative process, while developing the story parts tends to be more direct (and also writing/performing tasks had a workflow that could be adapted from other mediums). So this is how you get "story and gameplay segregation" where you alternate between playing the game and watching cutscenes. Because video games were and are a product, the efficiency of production is more important than the artistry of what you're producing. Which means the status quo of story and gameplay being separated works just fine, and there's very little incentive to explore how you can marry the two.

The result (especially with AAA games where the large budget means serious business stakes) tends to be video games where the gameplay is primary and the story is stupid and at odds with how the game works. Partly because video game storytellers are often rejects from other industries. Partly because the separation of the two processes means lack of familiarity with the game mechanics. Partly because the iterative part of game development can mean things change significantly in gameplay terms after you've already written, voiced, and animated your cutscenes and it's too late to change it.

This has started to change a bit more recently with "cinematic" games where aforementioned failed storytellers try to turn the game into their magnum opus, which is why story-focused cinematic games tend to be even worse. Hence the memes about walking simulators and "games" that are really "movies" (which was especially common on PS3 for some reason, encouraging a lot of "PS3 has no games" memes). TLOU is an extreme example of this IMO. There's really not much in terms of mechanical systems to master, and the "interaction" between the story and gameplay is basically quicktime events that give you a bit more interactivity than just pressing buttons on command. Remove the story and the gameplay itself is dead simple, unrefined, and really unengaging. Wouldn't bother me too much except that the story and characters ranged between uninteresting and intolerable (for me at least), but this whole situation is really an inversion of the problem rather than a solution to it.

I think the solution isn't a middle ground between these things, but combining them both at the same time. By this I mean having the "story" parts of games be more interactive like TLOU but to also have "game" parts that carry story content themselves, and for there to be more of a blending between them. Games like Deus Ex, Far Cry, or Breath of the Wild have the kind of game systems that work for this well. Having a game world where you can interact with a lot of different things that interact with each other means that the gameplay is already story-rich. There just needs to be an effective way of introducing elements to that which have the kind of "baked-in" story that people consider "story" instead of "gameplay" in a way that's more seamless and organic. Ideally you'd have sort of a continuum between emergent mechanical narrative and deliberately written story, where the player can't even tell where on the spectrum things currently are. All the elements have to actually be good though.

>TLOU2 controversy

It's obvious people were mad about Abby brutally murdering the last game's protagonist at the beginning of the game and then Ellie sparing her at the end, but they focused on the "political" aspects of the character because the actual reasons they were pissed off were huge spoilers (and a lot of them were either already looking to be mad or immature enough to lash out at superficial characteristics). Obviously people who are fans of a story will avoid spoiling it, especially spoilers like this (and Naughty Dog knew this). Anybody who acts like that wasn't the primary reason people were mad is either ignorant of the story or being disingenuous. Does this excuse the bigotry? No. Neither does it excuse Naughty Dog for intentionally provoking backlash from people. The fact that Naughty Dog intentionally wrote characters with controversial characteristics to do something that they 100% knew would piss people off (irrespective of said "political" characteristics) was clearly an attempt to start internet flame wars about the game and redirect anger toward these marginalized groups, leveraging the marginalization of women, queer people, etc to the end of marketing their product as "woke". It was a clever play in that respect (being effective marketing) but in terms of storytelling it's dubious and in terms of activism or representation it's cynical and exploitative. On all of these fronts they knew exactly what they were doing. They could have done representation and so on in a way that wasn't actively designed to maximize outrage (while also diverting outrage over an understandably controversial story choice onto marginalized identities), but this is what they chose to do. They still would have had plenty of marketing for their blockbuster game, still would have gained a lot of the attention (brand awareness) from anti-SJW outrage e-celebs anyway, and still would have been seen as "woke" if they did that. They could have made a character who wasn't designed to be a hate magnet for unrelated reasons which are spoilers and would encourage people to pick on other aspects of the characters out of bigotry/immaturity and to avoid posting spoilers.



Small list of problems with TLOU2's story:
1) The writer completely failed to make 90% of the playerbase sympathize with Abby's character. The remaining 10% who claim to like her are just contrarians pretending in order to piss off the other 90%.
2) The enemies, especially the main factions - WLF and Seraphites - are somehow even less nuanced and more ridiculous than the Fireflies from the first game. No villains besides Abby and her hanger-ons are given any real rationale for why they behave in the way that they do. Seraphites fight because "muh evil cult brainwashing" and waste time in infected hot zones trying to crucify dissidents because hurr durr evil cult, WLF fights because "muh generic paramilitary must always generically seek to control everything", and the bandit group in the final section of the game are pitch black in comparison to David's group in the 1st. For all the talk of being a "mature" "gritty" "realistic" story it sure seems like everyone hasn't moved past the Saturday morning cartoon villain bullshit.
3) The side characters all blow chunks. Dina sucks. Jesse sucks. Even Tommy sucks and he had additional characterization from the 1st game. Every single one of Abby's group are total throwaways meant to pad out Ellie's revenge quest by drip feeding her useless intel on Abby herself
4) The "twists" suck. Ellie giving up on revenge at the literal final millisecond was not earned. Ellie knowing that Joel lied was a massive waste of the big plot thread from the 1st game. Abby's dad being the doctor was also a super retarded move - she should have been another orphan Marlene's group rescued just like Ellie in order to more accurately characterize her as Ellie's dark mirror. Abby giving up on the WLF and rescuing Yara and Lev was also dumb and in no sense a "redemption".
5) Joel goes out like a bitch. The people who killed him use brute force but if TLOU1 showed players anything it's that Joel is a complete demon in battle and outright brute force always fails to beat him. The second Abby turned around with the shotgun Joel should have already finished Molotov'ing the rest of her group. If Druckmann had any brains in his head he would have figured out a way to get Joel killed that relied on Abby carrying out a complicated way of outsmarting or deceiving him to place him in an unwinnable situation rather than the lame ass way that he actually went out. Giving players temporary control of Joel during that segment to drive home the impossibility of victory no matter what the player does would have also been much better than a lame ass cutscene showing him beaten to a pulp.

God even writing this I'm getting pissed off again.


It's better than the unoriginal first one.


Well, yeah. That's the whole point of professional storytelling, to narrate it in a way that wouldn't feel "forced", as in, the writers didn't just make a game and then came up with a story to attach to it.
>unnecessarily limiting for the genre to focus too much on storytelling
Again, I don't think you can force storytelling per se, since it is the sum of all game elements.
>The focus should be on gameplay
Well gameplay IS a part of storytelling. Fortnite doesn't have a plot, but the gameplay and the setting, the design and the world themselves create a story for the game. Without gameplay you can't have a game.
>Videogames originated as purely gameplay with story amounting to giving…
Yeah, same thing with films.
Again, I feel like you think the narration is the same thing as the story. Stories have storytelling, and storytelling in videogames contains a lot of elements and one of them is gameplay. Gameplay is a part of the story, or rather "text", or whatever you want to call it. In experimental literature, a lot of times you don't have clear narration, even characters, or a real plot; but they are stories because they have storytelling. Now I admit that I don't exactly know what "storytelling" in videogames is, since there isn't enough theory on this art form, but still it's unfair to stick to the industry-defined meaning of stories.
>cinematic games
That is a narration problem. Minecraft has an excellent story yet there's not even one line of dialogue in the game.
Still, if you replace the word story with narration in your response, I completely agree.
>Gamers are mad because Abby murdered Joel
Yeah but they are also mad that Ellie spared her, but I agree with the rest of your arguement. Naughty Dog is, after all, a company and definitely wants to generate profit from the expected outrage.
>point 1: you either agree with me or you are a contrarian!!
Fuck off. Attempts to make you sympathize with Abby are definitely there, maybe not "good enough", but they worked for me. Also, sympathizing with her doesn't mean liking her, and not liking her doesn't take from the quality of her character.
>point 2
Wouldn't call it less nuanced, just the same thing from the last game.
>point 3: Every single one of Abby's group are total throwaways meant to pad out Ellie's revenge quest
Well motherfucker this is a revenge story. Everything in the game is supposed to literally do that. Yes you could say they could've spent more time on single characters, but what would be the point exactly? The game drags out even in its current form.
>point 4
>Ellie giving up on revenge was not earned
I don't think a desicion made in the heat of the moment was supposed to be earned. Sure, if the revenge was taken the story could be interpreted in a different way, but not taking it is just as powerful. The implications that revenge is not about the final blow, but the act itself and the destruction it generates doesn't come from finishing it or not, rather deciding to take it.
>in order to more accurately characterize her as Ellie's dark mirror
What? Do you fucking think Ellie is somehow a good character in this story?
>point 5
You do realize that it's supposed to make you angry right? Like you do understand his death is supposed to enrage you so you go on a fucking revenge quest, right? Holy fuck gamers. It's supposed to display helplessness so you have a real fucking emotional motive to even play the game. Are you braindead?
Also, if you read the post, my main talking point was storytelling. Storytelling in this game is out of this world, from the sound design, to the visual design, gameplay, the setting, etc.


You are a contrarian and your emotional response and swearing and attempt to personalize the discussion proves that you haven't really thought deeply enough about it but still somehow feel compelled to "defend" your "side".
>Factions and their Failings
The Fireflies were a great antagonist faction from the 1st game because you thought they were the saviors all the way up until the end when Marlene marches you out and you have to kill all of them. Their rationale and motives were easy to understand and sympathize with. Hell FEDRA was a great antagonist faction as well, they're the remnants of the government trying to maintain some form of order and safety despite everything going to shit trying to crack down on a violent guerilla group and criminals.
Even David's group is more understandable than the Seraphites or WLF - David's group is resorting to cannibalism because they have no supplies left and are driven to desperation to keep themselves alive. Meanwhile in TLOU2 the bandit group you run into is chaining up infected for shits and giggles for literally no reason other than to place themselves at increased risk like idiots.
The player at no point is encouraged to show any sympathy for enemy factions in TLOU2. The Seraphites are cartoon villains trying to kill Lev and Yara who are basically the Bambi of the game and so innocent than Abby can't justify killing them despite however many years of service with the WLF. Isaac is a warmonger who wants to commit genocide simply because he can't maintain a peace through keeping tight control over his own people. In every respect TLOU2 is a step down in the factions and enemy rationality departments.
>This is a revenge story it was too long already so Abby's group had to suffer from almost nonexistent characterization!
Then rework it. Any competent writer should spend more time fleshing them out. I didn't feel anything about Nora, either positive or negative, when she was beaten to death by Ellie, because she's such a non-character. The game at that point might as well have been asking me to show some sort of feeling towards a blade of grass. That just shows that the writer failed because in any revenge story you're supposed to feel something, either positive or negative, when a character finally receives their "justice".
>Dark Mirror
No I don't think Ellie was meant to be an angel and you missed the point. It's easier to make players sympathize with Abby if they see Ellie in her. Neil would agree with me because this is exactly what he tried to do with the Yara/Lev plotline mirroring Ellie and Joel in the 1st game with the hardened killer protecting the innocent but it completely failed because Yara and Lev are not compelling characters and Abby already brought in too much baggage from the beginning.
>It's supposed to make you angry!
Can you even read you illiterate? That's not what I'm arguing over. I'm saying that it was a mistake to TAKE CONTROL FROM THE PLAYER over such a critical moment, and it would be better to allow the player temporary control of Joel during an UNWINNABLE situation set up by Abby that makes it clear Joel can't make it out alive. Hell you could even stage a firefight in the very house that Joel died in as a 1v7 with traps lying around. If you seriously disagree with this very basic game dev principle and assessment then kindly never play any game ever again because it's such a rookie mistake and you obviously have no experience with the medium. Gamers make fun all the time of QTEs taking control away or a cutscene turning what was a won battle into an auto defeat because people with experience playing games understand that doing such things is a cheap cop out that ruins immersion.
The lore/setting is a complete mess after TLOU2 and basically anything can happen in any potential sequel because it stopped being realistic or grounded. I'll give you visual design and gameplay but visual design is basically a given with any major studio using advanced enough mocap and animation tech and the gameplay was hindered since Neil would rather be a movie director than a game director and enjoys marching people down long hallways and constantly taking people out of the actual game.


I think tlou2's story is shit but holy fuck a lot of the people who criticize it seem like they haven't even played the game (or at the bare minimum watch a playthrough on youtube) and are just regurgitating whatever they got from /v/ or some youtube video essay. Can't count how many times I've seen someone complain about Joel not going out like some hero (which Joel is far from, but a lot of people who like the character will insist otherwise) in a blockbuster movie. It's such a misunderstanding of what the game's story is going for, which there isn't much to get to begin with when the game is filled with enemies crying about their friend you just killed and going through a flashback of a flashback to see how much everyone liked the dog you stabbed in the neck 3 hours earlier (and of course the fact it's already a naughtydog game). Not getting characters or their motivations despite the game beating you over the head with them at every possible moment. And it all comes wrapped in making "improvements" to the story that don't actually improve what it's trying to do, but instead turns it into something fundamentally different and more palatable to the people outraged.


The fireflies were the good guys. Sacrificing Ellie's magical brain in order to save humanity was the objectively correct thing to do. Joel getting his shit beat in after murdering a bunch of brain surgeons and experts on the fungus was justice.


>Again, I feel like you think the narration is the same thing as the story.
I don't think that. I'm commenting on the usual assumption that that's how it works. Sorry if it was unclear. I think we should try to move past that separation and understand that game mechanics already have a story and to try to better integrate mechanical storytelling and the explicitly written narratives.
>Yeah but they are also mad that Ellie spared her
Might have mis-phrased, but I meant to include that as well. It's another decision that people were mad about, which prompted them to be mad at lesbians.


Sure, but it's a question of how they actually presented that in the game and what else they associated with that plot device. They could have characterized the people in that series of events in any way they wanted to, and what they went with was beefcake musclegirl (with a face that literally looks like a petulant child for some reason lol) murders the straight white man for reasons that aren't clear at the time. Like yeah in retrospect once you know everything it makes sense but it's deliberately presented in a way that initially obscures why things are happening the way they are.

>Can't count how many times I've seen someone complain about Joel not going out like some hero (which Joel is far from, but a lot of people who like the character will insist otherwise)
You're right he's not a hero, he's a huge turd but uh…
>spend entire game trying to make the players like the characters
>it works
>they are so popular they are used as mascots for the console
>kill character off in a way that's aping another current popular thing (The Walking Dead) to be edgy and dramatic
>[everyone hated that]
>*pikachu face*

>The player at no point is encouraged to show any sympathy for enemy factions in TLOU2. The Seraphites are cartoon villains
Especially funny considering how much the first game was trying to humanize the enemies, but it's the sequel where they are presented at first as basically guilt free murder targets that then tries to lecture about muh both sides. Like they got too up their own ass about making an artistic statement.
>I'm saying that it was a mistake to TAKE CONTROL FROM THE PLAYER over such a critical moment, and it would be better to allow the player temporary control of Joel during an UNWINNABLE situation
It's not a mistake, it's one more thing to make you mad about the spoiler situation. Everyone knows that people hate it when your character gets BTFO because of cutscene bullshit. They could have made it something that was better storytelling through gameplay, but that wasn't the point. Making people mad so they would go on line and say hateful things about Abby was the point.


Yahtzee coincidentally just dropped a video about this topic.
(polite sage for successive posts)


>you are a contrarian
again, how and why? you just said that everyone either hates abby or is just a contrarian.
again, i haven't played tlou1 so i wont comment on the comparison
>in any revenge story you're supposed to feel something, when a character recieves their justice
not really? first of all, there are no rules for literature and stories. you can't tell beforehand whether a concept works, in art. also, the main revenge story is about Ellie and Abbie, i don't understand why you're mad they didn't pay enough attention to Nora.
>It's easier to make players sympathize with Abby if they see Ellie in her
yeah sure, but this can be done in ways other than making one character the "darker" version of the other.
>if you disagree with this very basic game dev prinicple stop playing games
lmao go back to fucking reddit please. you only fantasize, "yeah what if they did this other cool shit bro," yet your only real arguement here is that giving the player freedom to engage in a suicide mission would be any better than what you got now? i would disagree, the current scenario actually makes it more infuriating.
>visual design is basically a given with any major studio
i don't think you understand what visual design and game design are.
>i think we should try to move past that separation and understand that game mechanics already have a story
yeah exactly my point. i think it would be very exciting to critique the story of the game mechanics in games like COD Warzone or Rainbow Six Siege where there's basically no plot or narration.
>why did muh beef woman kill the based white dude
you would literally say the exact same thing if any other person killed Joel except a white man.
>everyone hated that
yeah retard that was the point, but then they went on to harrass devs, make hateful comments and be gamers.


> i think it would be very exciting to critique the story of the game mechanics in games like COD Warzone or Rainbow Six Siege where there's basically no plot or narration.
All the shooters with health regen are basically saying "just wait a minute until your goldfish brain forgets you just got shot full of lead."

>you would literally say the exact same thing if any other person killed Joel except a white man.

No? It doesn't matter who did it, it's an obvious reversal of the norms, and keeping the motive a secret would make people angry and frustrated regardless. It's just that the devs chose to make the hate-sink be a character whose traits would be a magnet for actual bigotry.
>but then they went on to harrass devs, make hateful comments and be gamers.
Which ND knew to expect and intentionally baited anyway because they could exploit the bigotry for money. Both of these groups suck.


interesting video. i could never finish a david cage game because they're just so boring. i'm more interested in actual innovation in stories and storytelling. i think one roguelike or lite game like nethack or deadcells has an infinitely more interesting story than a cage-type game. but i can't talk much about innovation though, since it's not a fixed thing and changes over time.
>shooters with health regen are…
fair point. my argument was that we should study the methods of storytelling through gameplay mechanics more, and do that so in games where there's basically no conventional plot or characters, say Minecraft that i mentioned before too, which is this indie game that i recommend everyone to play.
>it doesn't matter who did it
yet we see that in the anti-sjw spaces it definitely did matter
>ND knew what they were doing
sure, still doesn't justify anything. also i believe TLoU2 was met with one of the more harsher instances of gamer rage since gamergate, correct me if i'm wrong.
>both of these groups suck
yeah not really. would say that about my buddy neil but the normal employees who were harrassed definitely did not suck.


>yet we see that in the anti-sjw spaces it definitely did matter
I mean it would be the same story regardless of what kind of person they made the antagonist. If it was another white guy, if it was a black guy, if it was a disabled transbian, if it was a zombie who gained intelligence, killing off the protag from the previous game would have been extremely controversial and made the fanbase hate the character who did it.
>would say that about my buddy neil but the normal employees who were harrassed definitely did not suck.
fair enough
Collectively, the dev as a whole sucks, but people working on the rotten flesh textures etc didn't do anything wrong. It's really the writers and whoever in marketing cooked up this scheme.


File: 1660264629556.gif (984.84 KB, 640x480, BlazeItFgt2 story.gif)


>content muncher
decent term for this approach to storytelling
There could be a list of different approaches with similar catchy names. Emergent stories from "immersive sim" games might be called "narrative gardens" or something after the gardening method of writing. Something like Shadow of Mordor's nemesis system could be called a "plot generator."

What would really be interesting is to build on the "director" AI from Left 4 Dead that adjusts the game balance behind the scenes according to how the game is going for the player(s). It would especially be interesting to combine it with an immersive sim type of game IMO because then you can have it monitor everything you interact with and use some kind of pattern recognition to push game events toward something recognizable as a story. E.g. if you drop some object to reduce carry weight it could flag the item as something enemies could pick up and use against you. Give it some rules like "Chekov's gun" where if something appears but gets ignored it will reappear soon being used by someone else.

>It's a mistake to try to cram a movie script into a video game when they're suited for very different experiences
As it's been said elsewhere, lots of game writers failed out of other industries, which tend to have pretty rigid writing formats. TV and movies have a given runtime and need to hit all the beats in a 3 act structure or whatever. This doesn't translate to video games very well in most cases, but they were trained to write in a certain way so they do.


>using chekov's gun in video games
that could make the game really interesting but i'm wondering how difficult it'd be to pull something like that off. is the hardware advanced enough to do something like that? keep in mind that no major publishing would want to do that since I believe console structures do not allow for a lot of CRPG elements to perform and they'd rather have the market
>this doesn't translate to video games very well
yeah, which is why i think there should be more theory on video game language and especially narrative through game mechanics. one of the more innovative narrations i've come across in video games is rogue(1980), where the narration is literally just game mechanics.


>I believe console structures do not allow for a lot of CRPG elements to perform
Yes, most consoles lack the CRPG processor that modern PCs have.


>i'm wondering how difficult it'd be to pull something like that off. is the hardware advanced enough to do something like that?
doubt it would be that hard, not really a hardware issue. I see it like this
<game engine already tracks the interactable objects in the world, including when to spawn and de-spawn them
<each type of object can have a list of "payoff" behaviors like red barrels exploding for example
<each object could have a flag for how significant it is to gameplay (probably a couple booleans, very little data)
<properties like this can be linked to keywords, so in a game like BotW where you have a rich soup of interacting systems, you can dynamically look at potential payoffs
<when using the despawn function, add a couple lines of code to check for the "chekov" flags to see if the object (or NPC) is significant enough to bring back later
<have an AI function scanning every 30 seconds or so for a lull in the action lasting too long or other such opportunities (can be as simple as "how long has it been since there was combat?")
<do a simple check for which entities are stored in the chekov buffer, which payoffs they have, and optionally if there is anything around the player's current situation that would be likely to trigger the payoff
<optionally have a number for how long ago the entity was encountered, depopulate from the list if it's been too long (make the time-out longer for more significant things, infinite for really important ones like quest items or something)
<for bonus points, wait until there are actual events nearby, so that you can re-spawn the chekov's gun and add complexity/wrinkles to the encounter (like monsters coming back to harass random civilian NPCs or treasure hunter NPCs finding a cool item you dropped for better loot), this way you get dynamic complex encounters based on how thoroughly you play the game
Not really that much information to store. Honestly this seems like it would be pretty simple to implement assuming the systems already present are fairly fleshed out and robust.


>It's a mistake to try to cram a movie script into a video game

Most video games are like 5+ times longer than a movie lol.


well yeah, whether it's too big or too small, having them not fit the format is the problem

Unique IPs: 17

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]