>"I don't care about story in video games"

>I don't care about story in piano
>I don't care about story in guitar
>I don't care about story in running
>I don't care about story in swimming
>I don't care about story in racing cars
>I don't care about story in collecting rocks
I can do this literally whole day.

A game could have a good story and shit gameplay and I would've wished I sat through a movie instead. Another game could have good gameplay and a shit story and all I'd have to do would be press skip.

Yeah I know. I know.

>video games are sports

Attached: kkqqsuytlxl11.jpg (480x640, 40K)

I love Chara !!!!

Attached: 73072743_p0.jpg (1020x1020, 447K)

a lot of stories are shit and forgettable, pic related, RDR2's story is mindnumbing but it's pushed into your face the entire time to the point that the gameplay suffers

>Piano is a sport.
Fucking Americans.

the most popular and successful game of all time, tetris, has 0 story. end of discussion

I don't *mind* story in video games, but video games that exist for the purpose of telling a story are self-defeating.

It just brings up all kinds of inconsistencies and holes in both the storytelling and the gameplay.

For example, in RedDead, I can play a murderous psychopath between two cutscenes where Arthur is crying about whether or not he's a bad person.
Alternately, the gang is constantly low on supplies and crying about never having any money, meanwhile I've got thousands of dollars.

If the story is too big a part of the game, then the **ludonarrative dissonance** is so great that you cease playing a game with a story, and you start watching a movie that makes you move around for half an hour, or playing a game that interrupts you with a movie, and the less you think of the two halves as a single whole.

Yeah fuck drumpf

>consuming a video game is equivalent to creating music

Attached: 1552922436911.jpg (474x379, 20K)

This.

Ironically, gameplay focused games tend to have better stories anyway.

>**ludonarrative dissonance**
Only pseudointellectual retards from Reddit complain about this, faggot. Go back.

lol I doubt even 5% of people who play any instrument ever created something. Majority of people just play stuff made by someone else because they just enjoy playing the instrument. Just like someone plays a video game made by someone else.

You're not wrong, but it is a thing, and it is very relevant in this discussion

>can't compare to books
>can't compare to tv shows
>can't even compare to movies
Why should i care for vidya stories? They are mostly shit from untalented writers. Also vidya is a inferior medium most of the time. It could be better but noone uses it in a better way to tell a story.

>Ironically, gameplay focused games tend to have better stories anyway.
This is the exact opposite of the truth. The exact opposite. Name one.
>weebshi--
lmao

Attached: 1532644935777.png (515x821, 59K)

That's a depressing insight. What's the point of learning an instrument if you aren't going to use it to make your own music?

Monster Hunter has no story. You play a character who wants to hunt monsters. Congrats, you achieved what you wanted. You can hunt monsters. You create your own motivations. Hunt the toughest monster. Make that special armor. Collect all the different bugs. Whatever.
But I'm sure you're convinced its target audience is literal children, right?

Stories in games are dumb. You know how we know? Because cutscenes exist.

Cutscenes are moments in a game that take control away from the player to tell the story. They literally STOP BEING A GAME so they can tell a story.

Imagine if you went to see a movie, and they turned off the screen so you could listen better to the dialogue. That would be fucking stupid right? But it's the same shit!

We wouldn't put up with other forms of media that *stop being that form of media* to do something, so why do we accept it from games?

Video games are interactive mediums. The closest cousins to video games are toys.

Good story and presentation of things, and contexts within the setting make a game more memorable and an overall better experience. Games are more than the sum of their parts, and rely on every component to elevate the experience to new levels. Even the story or music enhances the gameplay greatly, and works towards a common design goal. Not every game needs to, or even should be Tetris, or pong, or grey cubes with sticks hitting eachother. I get that the argument is 'games should be focused around the core gameplay first and foremost' and I agree with this, but you should never go too far and eschew absolutely everything else in order to have a slightly better base game experience. Imagine if Ludwig was just a grey pill with a sword and no music or title. Or Halo was exactly as it was but just grey hallways and amorphous blobs for enemies. That being said, it'd be great if devs could do the whole super mario 64 thing where they spend months just refining the core gameplay instead of coding the absolute bare minimum for it to work and then moving on to the rest of the game.

Attached: 1515308178695.png (496x499, 395K)

Stories in video games are just as hollow and immature. Strip away the bullshit because I don't have that much free time.

>Imagine if you went to see a movie, and they turned off the screen so you could listen better to the dialogue. That would be fucking stupid right? But it's the same shit!
This is the dumbest thing I've read all month.

Attached: ESBOpeningCrawl.png (1918x816, 864K)

No one actually enjoys reading that shit.

>the only way to tell story in videogames is cutscenes
play some non-AAA stuff with an overblown budget for cinematics. Games can have purely ineractively told stuff.

You use that example, but if Star Wars stopped the whole movie and had a scroll like that once every fifteen minutes, it would suuuuuuuuuuck

Ah, yes. DMC. The game series with no story whatsoever.
>Vergil would be a much better fight if he was a nameless, contextless npc.

>Adapt or die, manchildren.
Only the sith deal in absolutes

It’s kind of like Monogatari where it flashes arbitrary random scenes or words to make it look DEEP. Except that instead of flashing it, you’re gonna stare at it for 5 minutes.

Video games is a horrible medium to tell narratives. It's not the focus of the medium, and it is inherently inconsistent.(ie, characters dying from single shot in cutscenes, but surviving from several in-game). There is no other single narrative medium that requires the audience/viewer/reader to entirely ignore a big portion of the content in order to get a consistent narrative. For all the redditor manchildren who are seeking validation for spending thousands of hours on video games by forcibly changing the medium to something more "respectable" , should just fuck themselves in the ass with a horse dildo.

fromsoft proved you don't need a story to make a worthwhile game you just need to make it hard for the average retard and deflect all criticism by denouncing the critic's IQ and skill

besides you cant have both a fun videogame and a good story because the agency that drives the plot forward lies in the retard behind the controller who will always do unexpected shit and likely ruin or completely miss the whole story and if you put the player on rails and do what kojima does you end up with 8 hours of cutscenes and 1hr of gameplay making it both a shit story and an even shittier game where you're better off just reading a book about it

Rockstar has proven with RDR2 they can be extremely profitable with non-gta games, and clearly the Housers dont give a shit about the series and seem to resent GTA with the way they wrote and directed V, so why dont they just drop the series entirely? It's not like Rockstar needs Take Two, if anything Take Two is living off of them at this point, and I'm sure they'd like to dip back into their classic IPs

I don't care about Star Wars in the least, but I feel like the scrolling text is part of a *package* that makes SW iconic. But like stories in a game, the thing in and of itself can be pretty bad or just passable even if it somehow manages to contribute to the whole.
Like says, I hate just looking at that image, the way the text is angled almost makes my eyes hurt. And like says, if that took center stage any more than it does, it would have been outright terrible and obnoxious.

I think that's what's happening with stories in games at the moment. They can be a positive force when used moderately, but when my path gets blocked and have to wait for the NPC to finish the dialogue is when the whole experience goes to shit because it affects the player's pacing regardless of their choice. That should have been a cardinal sin when it comes to an interactive medium, but considering games like TLOU are so damn successful... eh, what do I know. It's just incomprehensible to me.

I was thinking about this the other day. Just compare the speedruns of a game that forces into exposition to a game where you can skip most of that even if the narrative is a large focus. Look at the pacing of both, especially the first 20 minutes or so, and tell me which one you'd prefer playing continually. This is where Western games fail, and why lifting story to the top can be a mistake.
youtube.com/watch?v=fsDw9wOrkgA
youtube.com/watch?v=ET6KJ9P46ac

Sorry, but I read books, watch movies besides capeshit, and consume actual, well-written entertainment, so vidya stories don't do anything for me.

>How can you enjoy Monopoly if there's no story?!
People like you are fucking moronic.

Gameplay should ALWAYS take priority

>Where is the joy of gameplay if it happens with no context, emotion, or stakes, and for no purpose other than to continue playing
So what, do you disregard the puzzle, rhythm, racing genre or something? Fuck outta here.

When I say I don't care about story, what I mean is that I don't try to enjoy the story. If the story is entertaining, that makes the experience better, but I'm not going to spend time to try and get engrossed in it. I will spend a lot of time exploring the combat of a game, for example, before I pass judgement on it. There are a lot of games where I didn't like the primary mechanics much at first, but they grew on me over time. This has never happened with the story. People say that the story is supposed to be secondary to the gameplay, or like window dressing. I don't think that's necessarily true. I think that story in games shouldn't get second chances. All of the best video game stories are engaging and interesting from the very first moment. There are a lot of games that require the player to get invested in a story first, require them to sink dozens of hours in a game until you end up feeling attached to the characters simply because you've spend so much time with them, not because they're well-written or interesting. Those are bad stories.

Because I'd rather play a game then watch it

the bare bones stories in ps2 nfs games were cool, not too intrusive
but if the game tries to be a realistic racing game then yeah any kind of story is retarded

OP is an emotionally stunted person who doesn't feel anything unless it's TV and/or movies.

He doesn't feel emotion from his own actions as a gamer, only from the action happening to the framed fictional characters.

Context is good and all, but having to take part in lengthy sequences where the developer expects me to be their butter pressing assistant while they do kino suck fat black dicks and I'm not going to pretend it's otherwise because those sequences work as a good machinima movie.
Context is important and so is story, but the most important thing is that the game engages me as a game and not as a movie.

what about having both type of games and everyone plays what he enjoys best

>watch movies besides
Which are mostly hackneyed, cash-in, often adapted, easily consumable for the masses, uninspired tripe. Unless a game's story is irredeemable garbage, they are borderline on the same level of entertainment as modern film. And again, that is not a high precedent in the slightest.

Can confirm, learning a tune is much like learning a video game.
The average game is just mashing chords to the beat in this comparison though: predictable and monotone.

I agree that there should usually be a reason for why you're doing what you're doing in a game, but it's not strictly a requirement. It's all about genre. What's more, it's only one piece of the puzzle so you shouldn't prioritize it over other elements. Gameplay should be the main priority with the other elements enhancing it.

Attached: 0101d1afc477a0ede2d1883fd4b3376f.jpg (732x1066, 144K)

>Which are mostly hackneyed, cash-in, often adapted, easily consumable for the masses, uninspired tripe
I would not call a film like Beasts of No Nation hackneyed, easily consumable, or uninspired.
It is however an adaptation of a book.
But no, games are fucking shit when it comes to story, and ESPECIALLY dialogue.
Fucking pulpy trash like Altered Carbon which literally features multiple anime tropes has better dialogue than 99.99% of video games.

Because playing is fun.
t. doesn't use the instrument I learned in making music

Patently false, as I also greatly enjoy the gameplay-resultant emergent storytelling of games like XCOM.

Attached: 1535252754787.png (680x907, 213K)

Simple, you’re a zoomer who grew up on movie games so you’re conditioned to like shit.

Most movies these days suck so can you blame people for preferring cinematic games?

Super Metroid.
Pac Man
Tetris
Mario
Kirby
Yoshi.

Damn good stories compared to "dude muh emotional feelings" from the latest shooter.

story should be context not content

Story is not the most important aspect of a game. While it is true that a story can help game be more engaging, it is not necessary. A game can be fun/challenging without a story. In contrast, a game thats only good for its story is better off as a movie and shouldn't be a game in the first place. To top it off, most games with
a focus on story still aren't nearly as good as actual movies/shows, so I'd rather spend my time watching something else then "playing" a movie game.

Never been a fan of the line block's genocide arc, feels too forced and hollow.

Story matters more when you're young and your frame of reference is limited. When you get older, assuming you've been consuming video games, literature, film, etc, stories start to repeat themselves over and over; not necessarily in full, but in many or most elements borrowed from each other, and any given story as a whole becomes less and less important than interesting art style, engaging gameplay and polished mechanics.

This

My first console was an SNES.

Attached: 1551518514656.png (500x500, 107K)

back in the days there were even more shitty movies than today because people went more to the movies and costs were lower, they just have been forgotten forever
besides, there are a bunch of good movies released every year, just dont watch capeshit and romcoms

Rockstar is one of the few Western devs that really knows how to make a game with an impressive amount of depth to the story and how it relates to the setting.

As far as a videogame story that can come close to being considered high art, pic related is literally the only thing I've ever seen that has seem to come close. I dunno what it is about Russians, but those fuckers really know how to create some fine art. Weebshit has a lot of really interesting and exciting stories, but they are more of an afterthought than something with actual depth.

Attached: 220px-Pathologic.jpg (220x310, 24K)

>People who feel this way, explain yourselves. Where is the joy of gameplay if it happens with no context, emotion, or stakes, and for no purpose other than to continue playing?
There's stronger emotions and stakes in a fighting game match than your average moviegame like Final Fantasy or TLOU.
Besides, all of those things can be conveyed through gameplay just fine, story elements are fine as long as they're there to contextualize what you're doing in the game when there's a need for it, anything more than that is pointless.

Gameplay is the story in itself either way, the way you're completing a stage in your average Castlevania is a story in itself, with no need for any written or spoken lines, the great thing about videogames is that gameplay IS narrative in itself, which most people, you included, do not seem to understand.
What you want isn't a game, but a book, or a movie.
>these story-lacking games are almost always aimed at literal children because you'd have to be emotionally-stunted or autistic to enjoy this kind of shit as an adult.
Pretty sure children do not play something like Tales of Maj'Eyal, Elona, Zachtronic games or Kerbal.

You need a story to enjoy chess, user?

I care about story in story focused games.
I dont give a fuck about story if its a Pure action game.

Its as simile as that.
I dont care abut story in DOOM or DMC or Bayonetta or a driving game.
I do care about story in Witcher or Torment or any RPG or in Adventure games.

Gameplay is king.
Gameplay is the single most important thing to consider when making a video game and it's importance supersedes every other aspect of a game. If the gameplay is shit it doesn't matter how amazing your story, your world, your characters, your visuals, or your music are, it's going to be a shit game because it's terrible to play with.
That doesn't mean, though, that these other aspects aren't important or can't improve a game, but they can't fix an inherently flawed game good. Games are toys, they're very advanced, complicated, toys, but they're still toys, and toys should be fun and entertaining.

The problem with a lot of these "video games are art" people is they have an oddly shallow, fart-sniffing, misaligned definition of what makes video games 'art' and try to shoehorn in unique visuals or good story telling while completing ignoring what separates video games as a medium from all other forms of narrative: play. They often try to treat video games like a visual medium when really it's an interactive and immersive medium that thrives on participation, so they in turn make shit games.

Attached: 7d8a98bccaa1581872a8531d9bbbce86.jpg (800x1032, 411K)

He basically was in DMC 1 but the Nelo Angelo fight is still great.

>street thugs kidnapped your girl
>go get her back
This is all the story any game needs.

>the great thing about videogames is that gameplay IS narrative in itself, which most people, you included, do not seem to understand.

Fucking THIS. A videogame allows you to actively role play in a narrative, and that's what makes it so appealing.

>quotations, meme words, downplaying, belittlement.
I hope you seriously never have debates with someone irl.

>Beasts of No Nation
Yes. Which is why it was a catastrophic box office flop. That film is an outlier and does not fall into the "mostly" bracket I mentioned. Such films do not appeal to the average consumer. Which is why directors and producers play it safe with the garbage I mentioned as a pay off is guaranteed. The medium has stagnated as it no longer exists to tell riveting or compelling stories of a vision, but to ensure there is a payoff. It's why I cannot watch a fucking movie trailer without a forced kiss scene or a half baked romantic subplot that only exists to garner female ticket sales. Films like Beasts of No Nation are sparse and few in-between. Though admittedly, I am a bit biased against it as I am tired of adaptations.

>games are fucking shit
You can say that all you want to. But again, modern film is no superior in that regard.

lol fag
youtube.com/watch?v=n7VAhzPcZ-s

Attached: switch owner.gif (500x500, 330K)

maybe try watching non american movies

>It's time to accept that your chosen form of escapism has matured and outgrown you. Adapt or die, manchildren.
The biggest games are all multiplayer ones that nobody gives a shit about the story though

I press button good. Press button good only important thing. Rest a shit.

frisk is better

>That film is an outlier and does not fall into the "mostly" bracket I mentioned. Such films do not appeal to the average consumer.
I can not think of a single game that comes close to the storytelling, emotional impact, or performances in a movie like Beasts of No Nation.
Not one.

>There's stronger emotions and stakes in a fighting game match than your average moviegame like Final Fantasy or TLOU.
That has everything to do with the competitive nature of the match and nothing at all to do with the game itself. You would get those same exact emotions and stakes in a game of rock-paper-scissors. If the actual game is completely irrelevant to and replaceable in the emotions it supposedly evokes then it has no emotional value. A game is not the means to an end, it IS the end. It's an experience.

Attached: 1552920895073.jpg (403x438, 25K)

Good point, actually.
Wasn't really arguing otherwise, user. All I said was that despite how gripping it was, it does not appeal to the lowest common denominator. And that the films which paradoxically outperform them in the box office are in my opinion, neck on neck with most "cinematic" games this day in age.

>That has everything to do with the competitive nature of the match and nothing at all to do with the game itself.
The game is the one setting up the competitive nature. Allowing you to experience the story in a unique way (without words or cutscenes) ensures an experience that only you could feel, AND it ensures replayability. A story heavy movie can only be played once, then it gets old. But something with replayability isn't marred by such a limitation.

for the same reason people play games like sports in real life

I understand that narrative is essential in our lives and that story - as it is written by others - is one way to access narratives. But the very act of playing game can create a narrative. I decide where to go and what to do and what the justification is. Other mediums exist for linear stories. Video games are unique.

OP is also a fag.

Right, but the point wasn't about just the average movie, it was about the fact that there are few to no games, even those with "good" stories, that can even tickle the taint of a good movie or book's story.
I dislike almost all vidya stories for the same reason I dislike most movie stories.
The only vidya story that I genuinely think is interesting is the original Deus Ex, and mainly because it was written by someone who actually paid attention to what was going on in the world outside of who was being meanie pies to faggots or trannies.

Yeah, how can video games ever reach the pinnacle of generic "war is bad and fuck white people" Netflix Oscarbait?

>That has everything to do with the competitive nature of the match and nothing at all to do with the game itself
This is dumb as fuck, holy shit. By the same logic, no particular story in and of itself has anything unique to offer, everything is interchangeable.

Or you could, y'know, actually watch the movie instead of just reading a plot synopsis.

>That has everything to do with the competitive nature of the match
Good thing that happen thanks to the VIDEOGAME and the GAMEPLAY being the context for those.
Wanna know how I know you don't play games with other people or have friends?
You know all those millions of greentext STORIES about coop, VS or simply tackling a game level in all those FPS or action games come to be? Thanks to the VIDEOGAME and the GAMEPLAY being the medium for those STORIES to emerge.
Again, gameplay IS narrative, gameplay DOES make you feel emotions and creates a story in itself.
Lurk two more years before posting anything again.

Attached: 1539136109750.jpg (518x355, 87K)

>The only vidya story that I genuinely think is interesting is the original Deus Ex, and mainly because it was written by someone who actually paid attention to what was going on in the world outside of who was being meanie pies to faggots or trannies.
...Warren Spector was making fun of conspiracy theories and the people who believe them, you braindead fucking retard. He was mocking you.

>but the point wasn't about just the average movie
Fair enough. That was my main point. I wasn't arguing the hypothetical cream of the crop.

And ironically his joke conspiracy theories weren't outlandish enough.

Except the movie has nothing to do with white people for the most part outside of some peacekeepers.
All of the actual conflict is between African governments, paramilitaries and warlords told from the perspective of a child soldier.

When the """""story""""" of your gameplay is just OOGA BOOGA ME WANT TO BEAT THE OTHER PERSON with the actual gameplay itself being completely irrelevant to its competitive aspect then it doesn't have any emotional value as a game, you insufferable, emotionally stunted little retard.

Attached: 1498572549178.gif (500x500, 42K)

All is ask is the gameplay AND story is just as good as the other

>crazy shit goes on in high government sectors, corruption is widespread in the real world and everyone knows this
>make game about it, has people thinking about it more
>HAHA JOKES ON YOU GUYS LOL IT WAS A JOKE ALL ALONG! FOOLED YOU!
Sounds like damage control

Stop embarassing yourself

You know somebody's truly on damage control when they start frogposting on top of posting incoherent ramblings

>When the """""story""""" of your gameplay is just OOGA BOOGA ME WANT TO BEAT THE OTHER PERSON
Yes, which is why we need 50 hours of cutscenes to tell us that instead.

Attached: bd8.png (279x246, 150K)

Story can give a game "seasoning" but it cant carry a game. Resident Evil 2 would be a lot less without its characters. Star Fox 64 wouldn't be the same without its iconic lines.

Why the fuck are you playing video games for the story? They have universally terrible stories

Yknow what's funny. Metal Gear Rising is considered to be one of the most plot driven, politically charged story games ever made, and it's revered for this. Ironically enough, the story and message of the game both tell the player the same thing. You're not some morality driven hero fighting for a cause; you're a sociopathic killer who does it for fun, and tries to hide that fact behind some virtuous character bullshit.

That's what video games are. Sure a plot is nice, it's a great way to help you forget that you just spent 50 hours killing a bunch of lines of code, but at the end of the day, the gameplay is what matters.

That's fair

>Metal Gear Rising is considered to be one of the most plot driven, politically charged story games ever made
by who, toddlers?

Nice bait.

Not my point. My point is that people wank off to the "Deep story" While not understanding that the moral is that the story is just there as a cover. Raiden is a killer, he does it for fun and nothing more. You like to play games, you couldn't give a shit about the story so long as you get to hack up some cyborgs.

A film that 1) has a fixed moral it attempts to shove down the audience's throat, 2) intends to specifically show the audience that violence is bad, and 3) does this through the use of children is the Holy Trinity of artistically devoid, manipulative filmmaking made by pretentious retards that functions as a shallow propoganda tool rather than a complex piece of art. It's cheap. No fucking shit violence is bad. No fucking shit people are going to feel sad when children kill and get killed onscreen. It's the lowest-brow shortcut to emotional connection there is and it doesn't deserve praise because of how incredibly fucking lazy it is. There is nothing I hate more than one-dimensional "disturbing" movies about violence.

Eternal reminder: GAMEPLAY IS KING.

Attached: 1549414305229m.jpg (1024x1024, 65K)

Story is all well and good but if I feel empty and pointless beating your game, then you should probably stop making video games and start producing David Lynch films. I fucking loved the gameplay of RDR 2, and this is coming from someone who enjoyed Way of the Samurai 2, a game so plodding, so slow in its mechanics and pacing that at one point you're teaching a child to read. But like that virtual reality SNL skit, Rockstar is so far up its own ass in trying to emulate the Coen brothers, that they forgot to just make a fun western game.

The epilogue was fucking terrible, the ending was outright predictable to the point of being passe. The narrative itself is just a hodgepodge of mainline Western films released over the past couple of decades.

The epilogue was so boring, and being forced to play as John was so jarring, so immersion-breaking, that I Am still stunned that Rockstar is still resorting to this bullshit since the first game. Making Arthur contract TB through a sidequest you're forced to complete is the most egregious example of disingenuous, hackneyed writing I've experienced in a long while. All the choices you make, wolf/stag, blah blah blah, none of it fucking matters. At the end of the day, you get to choose between begin shot in the head, or dying alone on a mountain side.

If you get a kick out of these dumb endings, more power to you. But holy fucking shit, the least they could have done was implement new game + so I could actually get Arthur in that Legend of the East outfit.

But Rockstar is deluded if they think I'm replaying this game again. Collecting all those pelts, doing all those missions, walking around the base camp, putting up with forced "cinematic" sit down sequences because the TB is just too much, is so utterly unworth it in the grand scheme of things. And if I have to play as some skinny little beta with a ball and chain to get a kick out of the post game, then I'm afraid Rockstar can choke on a bag of dicks.

Attached: 1459650956114.png (572x674, 616K)

Explain to me how "I want to beat this other person in [Activity]" is a story. Explain to me how that can be attributed to the game.

I tend to differentiate story based games, walking sims, etc from actual games where you do things. In my book, Undertale doesn't pass as a game. I enjoyed it a lot, but it's not there for the gameplay.

I'm just sick of what constitutes as a story in this era. I'd rather just look at guns, explosions and sword fights without any context, just tits, ass and actions. Story means I'll just be listening to someone complain about these dumb rl experience. I just want to chill, I don't want that.

I play both story driven games like modern naughty dog games, and games that are only fun because they have no story like Paradox games. Yea Forums has trouble processing my existence

Also this is the smartest user ITT

Lifelong rivalry, revenge story, war games. Come on dude that's not so hard.

So your gripe is with bad stories, not just stories in games?

Op is retarded.

Nobody cares about you, You die in the end anyways.

Have fun.

Attached: 1542757959903.png (470x410, 242K)

yes

Caring about story in a video game is like going to restaurant, ordering soup, and only admiring the spoon.

For me, a 10/10 game needs everything.

Good gameplay, good aesthetics, good music, good characters and of course a good story.

Granted a lot of games just shit out a story because they feel they have to. That's kinda why I hated BOTW. The story is garbage. They might as well have not had one to begin with. I hope it was worth sacrificing everything so you could still be less of an open world game than Skyrim

>Explain to me how "I want to beat this other person in [Activity]" is a story
That's not a story, that's a PREMISE for a story you fucking retard, the story is WHAT HAPPENS thanks to that premise.
Plain example:
>Premise: I need to go buy some grocery
>Story: You'll never imagine what happened when I went buying some grocery today
Seriously, are you a school dropout or something?
>Explain to me how that can be attributed to the game.
Because without the game said premise, and therefore the story that comes out of it wouldn't exist, you absolute retard.

Damn, I was dumb when I was younger but not at this terminal level of idiocy to not even know the difference between a premise and a story.

Attached: 1519202198516.jpg (716x480, 70K)

So basically you're seeing headcanons constitute as "stories?" Not him, but come the fuck on. Just admit that story isn't the selling point of an intrinsically well crafted or competitive game.

While I can respect the high level of consideration in not just throwing out a 10/10, what if the game is just made to be pure gameplay? What if it's the best story ever written but the gameplay is just to get you to experience it? It really depends on what the game set out to be. If a Mario game comes out with a fucking amazing story out of nowhere, it deserves extra points.

>

How is wanting to beat a real person in a video game in real life a story that can be attributed to the video game itself? That's not a story, that's human competitiveness, and you would have felt the same emotions over a game of Tic-Tac-Toe. The activity you use to compete over is irrelevant to the feelings you get from competition.

Attached: 1552921861674.png (600x656, 75K)

>seeing
*saying

A competitive game, maybe not. But if someone wants to use a game as a vehicle to tell a story, I don't see an issue. I will never rate it on the same level as a game made to be replayable, but some games like that have stayed in my mind for a long time. It's a different thing altogether in my mind. Apples and oranges. Competitive games should never focus on story, and story games will never have gameplay that's in depth enough to be competitive.

>wojack
duly noted, and ignored

>video game writers are fucking trash
This. Even the best writers tend to be one-hit wonders, like Amy Hennig who for some reason only writes generic Hollywood action flicks these days.
At their worst, video game stories are outright embarrassing. At their best, they're pulp garbage that would wind up buried in the free bins at Second and Charles. Very few are worthwhile stories on their own, and even fewer are actually told well.

There's some truth to the OP in that pure gameplay based games, while fun can get tiring without context.

I know that there are people that can play Tetris for hours but for me it would turn into an existential nightmare after a few rounds.

It's just general pseudo intellectual banter. He's just mouth breathing and not saying anything of substance, rather just making it expressively clear he's a retard who is conflating personal emotional experiences with actual in-game story telling.

Having a character who feels the same competitive spirit and exemplifies said human competitiveness obviously. Not every game is rated on its quality by how good it is in a competitive PvP sense and to think that it is means that you have a ridiculously narrow field on what constitutes a good game. It's not a crime to enjoy games that aren't PvP. There are things a game to do to make you love it aside from making you get competitive, and trust me, I fucking love competitive games.

Attached: Wow.jpg (1068x1062, 216K)

You clearly haven't actually seen the movie.

Story is by far the weakest part of vidya. Im not saying it cant be, but pretty much every other aspect is done better. Some vidya music can easily stand toe to toe with hit pop songs. Visually they can be as appealing as movies, not yet technically, but stylistically. Writing is utter shit compared to any decent book.

> Where is the joy of gameplay if it happens with no context, emotion, or stakes
are you a retard? have you ever played a Mario game? Did you ever give a single solitary shit about the "stakes?"
A good story can make a game even more fun and impactful but it's by no means necessary to make a good game holy shit.

People who say "a game can't be good without story" are stupid. People who say "having a story makes the game worse" are equally stupid if not more so.

You have a worryingly low IQ. You can't attribute the emotions from a real-life "story" of competitiveness to the activity you're competing in. They're not caused by the activity, they're caused by the act of competition.

Attached: 1531190029336.png (1462x2046, 442K)

>Something like Tetris needs a hollywood script...
...okay

>Games shouldn't make you feel emotions, they are for fun only, my version of fun and nobody elses.

Your inability to understand how anyone can gather joy from a story based game is why you're just not getting this. I fucking hate most story games, I wish they would cut out useless stories if they don't say anything meaningful, and this is 95% of them. But you're sitting here and telling me that it's just not possible to have a good story in a game and therefore they should all just be sweaty competitive fragfests with nothing else being permissible.

>Where is the joy of gameplay if it happens with no context
the gameplay is the joy you fucking zoomer

Mechanics >>>> story

It's not like you need a background for Tetris. If the game play is fun anything else like aesthetics and story is just icing on the cake.

>You can't attribute the emotions from a real-life "story" of competitiveness to the activity you're competing in.
>You can't attribute this story of an epic chess battle of wits to the game of chess itself

Attached: 1491821226533.png (500x377, 104K)

your used/free bookstore comparison is brutal but so true. send it.

> Some vidya music can easily stand toe to toe with hit pop songs
That's all? There's plenty of vidya music out there that beats the fuck out of whatever garbage Hollywood is pumping out these days. Reminder that fucking Black Panther got the Oscar for best score.
>Visually they can be as appealing as movies
Hell I'd argue that as of right now, they're actually MORE visually appealing simply because most Hollywood colorists are terrible at their jobs and most modern movies tend to look like low-contrast washed-out garbage as a result.

all threads like these accomplish is giving pretentious anons a place to sniff their own farts because they read books.

Ironic seeing as how all of the mega-popular zoomer games are pure gameplay with no story. Looks like you're the zoomer here, user.

Are you telling me that if a Mario game didn't come out tomorrow and have a kickass story out of nowhere you wouldn't care at all?

>But you're sitting here and telling me that it's just not possible to have a good story in a game
Are you quoting the right person?

>that's human competitiveness, and you would have felt the same emotions over a game of Tic-Tac-Toe
You really need to stop saying stupid shit like this. Obviously a competitive game isn't the same thing as exposing yourself to a narrative, but the problem with your particular argumentation is extremely reductive, and you're wrong even in the most basic technical aspect.

There's no way someone would feel the same emotional intensity of playing Tic-Tac-Toe as they would a fighting game, and that's not to say anything of the different strategies and dexterity required.
If your statement held any water then people wouldn't try anything beyond the same competitive game over and over since the dawn of time, and by the same logic, we would only need to tell ourselves one story for each theme every single time.

Given the non arguments of storyfags in this thread I doubt any of them read anything outside of maybe the ingredient sections on their cheeto packets.

Story is part of the formula that makes up a game, but as far as hierarchy goes, its at the very bottom of importance. Its basically fluff that can help improve the experience and world around it. Its not essential to some genres and you can get by with a bare minimum story in most games as long as the gameplay and graphics are on point. There are plenty of popular games that exist that exemplify just that from Mario(some story), Megaman(some story), Mineshill(no story), ect.

If you like narrative based games more power to you OP but I'd rather waste my time on a game that allows me to get more enjoyment and interactivity in the world through a show and tell and less cinematic cut scenes. Beating a boss who mutters out a few worded warning of whats ahead as they fall through an audiofile/subtitle is a lot more tense to me then being thrown into their theatrical death.

Attached: 1544821944528.jpg (483x461, 31K)

>implying rockstar doesn't put gameplay first and foremost

This.

people who say that never played a good story-driven singleplayer game.
Thing is, there are only so few out there.

>non arguments
What arguments are you looking for? This is Yea Forums. Even the anti-story fags "arguments" amount to the obligatory "it's shit" and prate incessantly on their preferred venues of consuming stories. It's just shitflinging all around.

How about make good fucking gameplay first and care about story second?
If a videogame is remembered and talked about for its gameplay 50 years from now then it was a good game
If a videogame is remembered and talked about for its story 50 years from now then it was a bad fucking game

It's almost like you didn't even read the post you replied to.

>he didn't understand the deep meaning of aligning block together
kys tbqh

I'm a proud storyfag and I've published several pieces of literary fiction and poetry. What have you done, user?

>I've published several pieces of literary fiction and poetry
You know what to do

While I liked RDR 2's story, it slowed the game down to a crawl, forcing you to go slow if you went on a mission with other gang members, which was most of them.

A story shouldn't slow down a game to a crawl.

Attached: 1556256421948.gif (128x128, 155K)

Max Payne 1 had a good mix of story and gameplay.

Max Payne 3 is a good example of what happens when you prioritize story over gameplay, and is the worst in the series because of it due to forced cutscenes every few minutes.

>Max Payne 3 is a good example of what happens when you prioritize story over gameplay,

this. I remember having fun playing 1 and 2. I literally remember nothing about 3 other than it took place in Brazil or some shit. Also the fact that they made Max not look like Sam Lake is a crime.

This shit is also why I hate Halo 3. It didn't do it THAT often, but when the game would literally cut your walk speed by 75% so you could have SO EMOTIONAL corrupted Cortana narration was so fucking annoying. Every time it happened, I contemplated just shutting the console off.

I don't care about story in games. I barely care about story in books. Writing being good is a plus but some of the greatest games give you some feeling of making your own story, or living or playing through some imagined world. You have it the wrong way around friend, games which try to emulate movies are usually the most soulless shit imaginable. Max Payne 1, 2 and even 3 are the closest thing I can think of that has anything resembling a set story, even if it's more of a plot, for the player to work through, but they work because story never overrides the importance of gameplay mechanics anywhere. More than story, it simply has writing, and it's great and turning the whole thing into one concise experience. Bloodlines, Half-Life, Portal, Dishonored, Thief etc. all have great writing, but the moment I consider these games having "a story" is the moment I surrender any suspension of disbelief I have when it comes to feeling like I *PLAYED* those stories my way and in doing so "made" them myself, and I don't see any point in doing that beyond discussion. Games that have linear set stories for the player to wade through I've always found tedious, forced and boring, and usually can barely be considered videogames. You're the one who has some growing to do pal.

I dont what you're really getting at OP but fighting games are pretty fun and literally no one cares about the story of those; at least not in the competitive scene.

zoomer games are all skinner boxes with shit gameplay

based

>If a videogame is remembered and talked about for its gameplay 50 years from now then it was a good game

In theory, this is correct. How many titles genuinely fit this mold, however? While it is a facile task to note entries which pioneered contemporary gaming, be they: Pac-Man, Pong, Tetris, and even Super Mario -those titles have decades worth of nostalgia and influence attached to them. And with the exception of Super Mario, I do not consider any of those "good" games. But I do consider them important.

Having said that, look at Yea Forums. How many of these topics *actually* have stimulating discourse of gameplay mechanics? Even the most lauded here? It is ironic for such contempt on "movie games", this place is almost entirely incapable of discussing games outside the context of waifufagging, memes, and storytelling. Even fighting games aren't exempt from this. I just popped open /fgg/ and I have no idea WHAT THE FUCK that thread is about, but it isn't fighting games.

My main point is, while I believe gameplay should be the most pivotal facet, it's often not the most "memorable" part for some people. It's the entire experience: and the world that the player engaged in through that gameplay, is generally at the forefront of those memories.

You can have a good game, but still be mostly remembered for the story. They aren't mutually exclusive.

This. I wouldn't consider Thief 1 and 2 to have amazing stories, but the writing was fantastic, and they had the absolute greatest cutscenes of all time, which were proper rewards for progressing in the games.

youtu.be/-AAzkPkiImo
youtu.be/Mt0SRFG5cVs

You just got older, user. That's all.

Funnily enough max payne 1 is a product of its time and it only turned out so well because of technical and budget limitations, not by design.

You play a game to beat the challenge, no other reason

>where is the joy of gameplay if ....

in the act of PLAYING the GAME.
fucking faggot, do you need some lore too i order to play football with your mates? Do you really need a backstory to play Donkey Kong, you twat?

Attached: 1557013114969.jpg (612x380, 27K)

This pic confuses me. On one hand he's a neck beard. On the other he has very nice skin.

Story or context is not appreciated by autists. They just want to collect coins and/or make the hp bar go down, it's the repetitive ritual.

Some games tell story almost enitrely through gameplay. Bloodborne
>inb4 it had like 3 10 second cutscenes so it sucks

I play tekken to beat other people at tekken. I don't care about the Iron Fist Tournament. The story is shit and a half at this point anyway. I think stories are cool. Not every game needs a story. Gameplay is always number 1 for me

I rather have a good game and a shit story than a good story but a shit game.

>Do you really need a backstory to play Donkey Kong, you twat?
Not him, but some people actually prefer having a sense of directive or being engrossed in their character's story as opposed to using them as an avatar for their self insertion. For me, "mindless" fun can eventually become tiresome. It's why I can enjoy Ocarina of Time, Twilight Princess, and Skyward Sword but get bored shitless with Breath of the Wild after a few hours.

You don't consider Tetris to be good? Why?
Even Pong isn't a bad game exactly, it's more rudimentary. I think there's a bit of a difference there.

>Having said that, look at Yea Forums
Yea Forums and Yea Forums as a whole is generally pretty garbage. I recall a screencap, I think from a /fgg/ thread of other forums and websites actually discussing the technical aspects of a game, while people on Yea Forums dwell on trashy topics that you mentioned.

>My main point is, while I believe gameplay should be the most pivotal facet, it's often not the most "memorable" part for some people
>You can have a good game, but still be mostly remembered for the story
I get what you mean with your first point, but I don't think the second is actually true. I think what people remember is the overall direction and specific moments due to their presentation. People remember the famous ladder scene in MGS3 because it happened right after a boss fight as a great moment of down time, and as an intermission between two completely different areas populated by different enemies and challenges, and aided by extremely memorable song lyrics. That part has little to no narrative. The gameplay ramifications are always running in the background even though we might not consciously think those had the biggest impact.

A game can only be good if you can take out everything else and still enjoy the gameplay. If the game is boring without the story, then it's bad with the story.

Attached: 1554825268984.png (576x432, 218K)

Would you consider The Secret of Monkey Island to be a bad game? How about Planescape: Torment?

Tetris gets boring after 10 minutes unless you have severe autism, I don't know what else to tell you.

It's fine if you want to make a narrative heavy game, but unless you're going to put the effort into doing the story WELL then you should just fuck right off. I'd rather have something campy and low budget like EDF than 90% of the narratives in triple A gaming.

>Some games tell story almost enitrely through gameplay
It has a captivating atmosphere and gives you interesting lore (if you look) that you can piece together to form a semblance of a "story." But it hardly tells a story, and that isn't the point. It's to thrust you into horrific lovecraftian world of nightmares that you soak in every last detail and salvage the story from the world itself at your own discretion.

I can't say I'm a fan of either. Without the stories, I don't even remember much of the gameplay.

Are you the same guy who wrote that comment? If so, I'm pretty disappointed with that sort of response, not gonna lie.

I don't get it either. Would DMC be as fun without a story? Nah. What about games like Fallout and Morrowind? The story, or dialogue, characters and whatever are a solid chunk of the experience.

A game like Dustforce? Don't care, and Dustforce doesn't care either. It literally just depends on the game you're playing, video games don't exist in a vacuum.

Attached: 1527641811662.jpg (235x228, 16K)

I would play all of those without a story, if the gameplay was fun enough. If I want excess story, I'll go watch a movie.

You can name things that have no narrative elements all day?
I'm fucking impressed, very good job man. /s

Just because I don't care about it doesn't mean I can't enjoy it. If there's a story and it's interesting, great. But having the absolute worst story ever won't stop me from playing a game that's super fun, and have an amazing story with no game will never make me play a game.

Same but certain vidya have fulfilled me more than anything in those other mediums in terms of story.

I think in the context of the OP, what he's talking about is specifically plot. Writing and lore are great, but when people say a game has to have a "good" story, they're really just looking for a plot to follow along with. Fallout and Morrowind don't really emphasize plot as much as the writing and lore in general. Most people don't really laud those games for the plot specifically.

Also, I wouldn't really care if the story was ripped out of DMC. It's entertaining, but at the end of the day, the games are about stylishly murdering demons in the most over the top ways.

When I look for a game to play, I look for what kind of content it has and what kind of things I can do in it. The story doesn't really matter to me as long as I have fun.

I wouldn't call 3 games a one hit wonder. SR1 was her best sure but SR2 and Defiance were pretty neat as well.

>fromsoft proved you don't need a story
But all their games have a story. They just don't shove it down your throat.

Zoomer confirmed.

You tried

There hasn't been a single game with a noteworthy story.
You crying your fucking eyes out because Joel's daughter you knew for 10 minutes just kind of makes you a gigantic bitch, you fucking faggot.

Attached: 1372618056900.jpg (1788x1124, 360K)

>video games that exist for the purpose of telling a story are self-defeating
disagree, some genres of games like point-and-click and CYOAs work very well in conjunction with the story

>games

Because if a game is fun and has a story then that's great but if a game makes their story first and doesn't care about making fun gameplay or at the very least act like the gameplay matters (As some games are very intentionally designed to not be fun) then quite frankly they come off as pretentious and full of themselves.
It's why I can't see The Last of Us as anything but a bog standard Third Person Shooter in a zombie apocalpyse, because they clearly cared less about the game part than their narrative. The Order 1886 is the extreme of this concept.
I'd rather a game with little to no story and fun, engaging gameplay to a game that pretends its telling a deep nuanced story but has its gameplay just be some mediocre system other games did better. It's like trying to call Wolfenstein: TNC a better FPS than Doom '16 because it had more story focus.

>They just don't shove it down your throat
I think that's the biggest issue here. No one is truly advocating for the complete removal of any and all narrative elements in games. It's just when the emphasis on story comes at a cost of engaging gameplay, controls, pacing, mission/level structure, etc. that it becomes something a lot of people feel annoyed by. At least that's what I feel towards the sorts of games that rely on unskippable "walkie-talkie" scenes, extremely shallow QTE or puzzle segments as a way to build a relationship between the characters, moments where your movement speed is arbitrarily reduced, or where you're forcibly locked into a room for the purpose of exposition dump.

I like stories in video games but you're fucking dumb, user.

No, is not me. As for Tetris:

I suppose "good" is not an apt descriptor or adjective. That was more or less a subjective "good" quantified by my personal enjoyment. In more objective terms, I can acknowledge Tetris as a mechanically sound game with a clear cut directive. It also not only challenges your reflexes, but rewards thinking on your feet. So having asserted that, I can acknowledge it as a "good" game on that metric. But personally, it bores me and I can't derive much satisfaction from it.

>MGS3
I can certainly concede that. Superlative game direction and atmosphere can definitely supersede narrative in terms of "lasting impressions" if done correctly. But I contend that moment was impactful, for me, due to the game's story and ambiance.13 years ago playing Snake Eater for the first time, all I did was reflect on my journey as Snake as I climbed that ladder. It would not have *hit* me the way it did I Snake were just some random soldier sneaking around breaking necks. But on a *gameplay* note, what I remember most was the "Sorrow" boss battle. Not because of the story, but because of HOW FUCKING LONG it was due to my actions killing literally every soldier I came across. Rare moments like that stick out for me just as much a solid narrative.

On the otherhand, there's my friend who I introduced to MGS some years back. While he enjoyed the gameplay heavily as it was his entry to stealth based games, he still remembers mostly how the ending affected him above all else. That's why I contend story and gameplay aren't mutually exclusive. It's ultimately apples and oranges.

Kill yourself OP.
If it's surprising to you that Tetris or Monster Hunter can be fun for a long time, then you are most likely the reason the industry is pumping out these incredible amounts of garbage, because apparently there's a lot of you.

Attached: japanese game design.png (767x669, 102K)

Bet you never played a point-and-click adventure game that's not an interactive movie before faggot

He'd have a point if he wasn't using Hideo "Please Let Me Direct Films I Fucking Hate Letting People Play Games" Kojima as a standard for gameplay over story.

I agree with you on Kojima being a piss poor example to illustrate the point, but he's still right overall in what he's saying. All those other companies he mentioned certainly fit the bill.

>because they clearly cared less about the game part
I have to disagree with this. I know Yea Forums gives this game a lot of flack, but this is patently untrue. It is undeniable the story comprises a much TLOU's identity. But it was not my GOTY 2013 on the story alone, but the gameplay. My initial playthrough was on Hard, followed immediately by Survivor. Not once did I feel like I was "watching a movie", I literally felt like I was Joel and Ellie doing my best to survive. Whether it was scrambling to craft something useful due to my paucity of resources, throwing a brick to distract a clicker, shifting from area to area unseen, discerning whether it was optimal to keep stealthing or run and gun, etc. I have a shitton of memories with TLOU's gameplay, which is ironic since it's mostly considered a movie here. Honestly, I am not sure what game most you people played.

I remember Mattosis in one of his videos mentioned an interview with a Capcom(?) dev, and he pointed out how the West concerns itself more with things like realism, such as footsteps sounding different each time on all types of terrain, whereas jap devs go with a more basic "clip clop" approach.

Dumb zoomer meme. MGS in particular feels very arcade-like in how it plays on the whole (not to mention MGSV). His games feel way more "game-y" than a AAA oscar bait coming from NaughtyDog or R*.

MI games have more writing and plot than story. PT is mostly the same thing in an entirely different way. In both cases writing is servant to the gameplay and not the other way around.

Forgot to expand on my point, but focusing on things that don't directly tie to gameplay in any substantial way, but instead general small touches to try to make the experience feel more "life like" is what's been ruining Western action games for me. Another big example of this is input lag and lengthy animations which makes characters feel like shit to control.

I always hear that used in these threads, to just play on the hardest difficulty and it becomes the game everyone gave 9s and 10s across the board but I tend to be skeptical, especially when Naughty Dog referred to themselves as "more grown up" and their games "engaging" because apparently fun is a taboo word or some shit. In the end I find it highly unlikely that it's somehow worth all the praise just like Undertale isn't worth all its praise. In the end I'd still rather play Vanquish if I want a third person shooter and if I want to be in an oppressive atmosphere and desperate to survive while pursuing a narrative I'd rather struggle through Pathologic because it's far more interesting narratively and the game is unfun to enforce its atmosphere.
I compare TLOU to a summer blockbuster flick, it's probably not awful but it's definitely overrated and there'll be stuff out there that does things better than it. I never played TLOU because there is absolutely no way in hell it will live up to what everyone says and I'm not willing to spend money on a gamble when I could play things I know I'll enjoy more.

>I never played TLOU
You are fucking retarded.

>Explain at length my reason for not playing it, never even claim it was watching a movie but just that other things do different parts better
>"You're retarded"
Good retort, I'm going to go buy the game right now because of your brilliant insight. I guess that's what happens when I try to act respectful about it and my thoughts instead of just slinging insults.

I mean, you're so retarded you don't even see how retarded it is to claim that something is overrated and then admit that you've never even played it.
I even agree that it is highly overrated (I have actually played it), but basing your opinion on literally nothing except "hurr everyone loves this game so it must be shit" is the epitome of retardation.
You're a retard.

>I always hear that used in these threads, to just play on the hardest difficulty and it becomes the game everyone gave 9s and 10s across the board but I tend to be skeptical

It's never a bad thing to exercise caution. I never played the game on anything less than "Hard", but that was my initial experience. And I sincerely doubt I would have gotten that 9 or 10 experience if I played on anything lower, as I suspected it would have just become a generic TPS and not the stealth/crafting experience I bought it for. Suffice to say, I wasn't disappointed. It never felt lacking in the gameplay department.

But if it's not your thing, more power to you. I just know that I fell in love with the gamplay as soon as I saw the E3 2012 feed.

And for the record, isn't me.

I didn't say it was shit, the worst thing I said was that ND cared more about story than gameplay and that was a general explanation on why gameplay still matters more than story. Lots of people loved Avengers Endgame, cried too, I didn't, I felt it was fine but I wouldn't have seen it if I wasn't going with friends. I also mentioned Undertale, a game I played at launch before the hype train hit it, was overrated too. It's not retardation to not want to buy a game that doesn't look worth the money you could use on something you'd prefer.

By the way
is me here

>where is the joy of gameplay
Right there its the gameplay you moron

its a childish view where button=awesome is the pinnacle. All they enjoy is flashy lights and awesome moments absent any sense of stakes or context.

That's fair, I never said it was a bad game and I know there's some quality to it for it to get the praise it does but I also temper my view of all that praise because nothing is perfect and some quotes the game got like "The Citizen Kane of Gaming" blew it out of proportion for me. Maybe some day I'll try it on sale out of curiosity or if PS Now decides it's going to be closer to Game Pass than OnLive in terms of its distribution but right now I have little money and lots of things I want.

There are plenty of excellent games without story or context. In fact I'd say story can be detrimental in a lot of cases if it's poorly executed.

(You.) Stop that. I get what you're telling him, but I just want to have a discussion without shitflinging.

Attached: Lying on the internet.png (344x131, 5K)

>you have to eat shit in order to have an opinion in its taste
Mate the only retard here is you.

>not counting the multiplayer
What is perfect in this game... everything.

That still doesn't answer the question

you're a fag

>yeah I instantly turn off ingame music and skip any and all text and cutscenes, what about it?

Attached: gigachad.png (822x960, 373K)

>I told him "you tried". That'll show em!
kill yourself shitposter

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 53K)

This, I legit skip like nearly every single cutscene and never read mission text in nearly every game I play.

>turn off ingame music
>blast incredibly unfitting generic house music throughout the whole game

Attached: chad.png (320x320, 66K)

How about you go watch a movie, faggot.
Movie games have absolutely no replayability and gameplay will always be KING

Attached: 1553822820973.gif (800x450, 2.59M)

Focusing on stories limits your ability to fully enjoy the medium. Many, many games try to use a trite, polished, crowd-pleasing story as a crutch to hold up an otherwise mediocre, unoriginal game. I want well-rounded games, where the gameplay is engaging and entertaining without relying on the story or visual presentation to do the heavy lifting. I like games that challenge me and ask me to improve, which keep them from feeling any more hollow than watching a story about a cowboy dying of cholera or whatever.

Gameplay comes first.
If you're taking away control from me to tell me about how sad it is that this fictional character lost his fictional wife and he died protecting his fictional family, I'm gonna be kinda ticked and start pressing the skip button.
But if it's inbetween gameplay levels or optional like Rosalina's story time or the guys sitting around town in MonHun, I don't mind it as much. I choose to listen to what they have to say.

Attached: 1556482192005.jpg (422x422, 27K)

What a shitty opinion, some of my most fun emotional and high stakes moments in vidya are in multiplayer shootan gaems, you know where gameplay is what matters not some tacked on story.

>obligatory Carmack quote

know what story brings?
>unskippable cutscenes
>slow text speeds
>unskippable text

All the stakes are artificial. Blah blah "ancient evil" who gives a fuck, gee i wonder if they're gonna fail at the end of the game. It just gets in the way.

only literal retards call people correctly using video game terms on the video game board a pseudointellectual

Metal Slug

You do know whenever people say "We don't care about story in games" It's only ever in regards to cutscenes or exposition walking segments. It's never about games like souls where the story is hidden in the game world and you have to go looking for it and infer detail from it. That shit's good for games since it isn't invasive and pulling control away from the player. That's never what people mean when they say they don't care about story. Notice how the people that start these threads ALWAYS post pics from cutscene heavy games. That's the tell.

I only hate it when the story takes priority over the gameplay.

Fact of the matter is that majority of stories and plot in video games a derative, clichéd as hell trash that a 15 year old could write.

Yes that includes anything from Rockstar and Naughty Dog.

The second the developer takes the control from the player to have the sit through a 8 minute long scene just to try to sell the game of as something artistic, I zone the fuck out and start despising the game.

The few exceptions to this rule might be Metal Gear Solid 1-3 because it's so meta and self aware it gets away with it. Everything else comes off as pretentious as fuck.

Attached: 1504991426079.jpg (840x623, 159K)

I bet you like Naughty Dog games, you cock gobbler.

Attached: AAC362AE-E77C-44F4-B39C-09DA3BBB7F6F.png (157x196, 63K)

Art Style > Gameplay > Music > Characters > Story
Discuss

Doom 2 is a better game than any of your stupid fucking story driven games and it came out 25 fucking years ago.

People have complained about the inconsistencies between a character's actions in cutscenes, the plot and story, and what the player is capable of doing in a video game for decades, you retard. You're just mad because a term was made to describe it.

What a lot of people don't realize from the last paragraph in this picture is that that kind of approach to game ideas is why so many Japanese games have fucking ridiculous stories that are incomprehensible unless you've actually play the game and experienced it yourself. They also have a lot of shitty boring generic stories but there's way more shitty boring generic stories in the west and it's because the entire focus on the game is making a stupid 6 hour long movie that the same kind of people who binge watch netflix will want to play.

It actually does answer the question completely since some of the best games have all the emotion, context and stakes without the need for a stuffed hamfisted "story"/

Attached: 1548923156440.png (471x451, 206K)

Says jap behind wagglan machine.

>Having said that, look at Yea Forums. How many of these topics *actually* have stimulating discourse of gameplay mechanics? Even the most lauded here? It is ironic for such contempt on "movie games", this place is almost entirely incapable of discussing games outside the context of waifufagging, memes, and storytelling.

That's because Yea Forums is overrun with casualfags who suck dick at video games and half of the "contempt" towards movie games is only ironic.

FPBP

There's 30% story and like 70% game play in RDR2. With it's sandbox and environment interactions. You can do more in RDR2 than any of these others games people are claiming to prioritize game play over story. It takes like 2-3 new games+'s in most of these games to cover the content of one good RDR2 play through.

In short, if you hate RDR2 you have a bias and vendetta out for it.

There are literally no stakes in a game that puts its story first. The story will play out the exact same way and the game certainly won't punish you for fucking up.

I got nothing wrong with a story, but the game needs to have both equal parts story and exhilarating game play in order for them to compliment each other. You can have a game be just a game, with no story, but you can't have a game be just story with no game. Because then it's just an interactive movie. And like this user said most fucking game writers are hacks that try way too hard to write compelling shit above what they're actually writing for, which is A GAME

I think OP doesn't mean oscar worthy material but at least a context. Even Duke 3D has an context why you kill those alien bastards.

Most video games have a story. Even Donkey Kong and Space Invaders have a simple story to tell. What becomes annoying and unbearable for some is when the narrative, and aspects of it, are no longer in service of the gameplay. David Cage games and even arguably The Last of Us suffer from this imbalance.

Attached: 1552531957379.png (160x240, 2K)

all music is a meme, it's literally just wiggly air

I like story in vidya
as long as we admit no voice acting is not a deal breaker

>Mario
>Kirby
>Yoshi.

Do you honestly believe this? I love their games, but wow their stories are fucking awful.

RDR2 felt like one big tutorial.

>youngfags pretend to know whats good

first of all, video game stories are ALWAYS cartoon/comic-tier, you shit taste having jack ass. lol this isn't even a mystery.

even arthur morgan, was just a exploitation and total milking of over dramatic sadness. a lot of the pivotal moments from both red dead's were just stolen from ACTUAL good movies with great stories. rockstar is renown for ripping off popular cinema. whether it's scarface, martin scorcesse films, quentin tarantino films etc etc.

Attached: jagsman.gif (236x224, 1.89M)

literally this

when it comes to video games, story is always second to the immersion created through gameplay.

The kind of people who seriously care about story in vidya tend to be obnoxious manchildren who want their goofy little hobby to be as grown up as they think they are. They're the modern equivalent of those fags in the 2000s who demanded that games like Mario have more blood and cursing in them. And the thing is, when you ask them an example of a game with a good plot it's always hackneyed horse shit like Kingdom Hearts.

Attached: Hellena_Taylor.jpg (210x316, 52K)

>I never played TLOU because there is absolutely no way in hell it will live up to what everyone says and I'm not willing to spend money on a gamble when I could play things I know I'll enjoy more
I agree with you but I ended up getting it(came with my PS4 bundled) After hearing all the praise and fanfare, sticking the game in, It was fucking boring. All this "watch this cutscene" followed immediately by "and now here's this totally gameplay thing except you need to wait for some slag to finish talking at you". Gameplay was not fun in the slightest and felt insulting at times(I push the button for a fucking reason, I don't need your fucking sliding or any of that shit) plus there were way too many contextual animations that made it feel like I had less control than I did. Plus some responsiveness issues with turning around. Then there's the AI which to put nicely was AMAZING... if I got off to leg humping. After all these people telling me how ground breaking it was, it was ridiculous watching them prove to be literal fucking brainlets and the zombies weren't much better. Then there's the issue of fighting humans far more than zombies and none of the zombies being particularly interesting.
The game was chock full of melodrama too. It was worse than a soap your grandma would watch but all of it was painful to watch since it looked more like it was just trying to be edgy guro porn instead of making deaths meaningful.

It's meant to compliment the gameplay at its core and no game can ride its story to success if the game itself is ass

Switch art style and gameplay and I agree
Gameplay is the most important