Wii U General Discussion

[Zechs Merquise]

Well that's fine if you don't want to play these games. But your original comment was that the developers had lost track of what they were doing by making these games. Which is indeed nonsense.

 

No it isn't nonsense.

 

Film, despite being a visual medium is based on telling a story. Watching a film that is a visual masterpiece - well directed, stylish and has a distinct artistic style is great, but without a good story it just feels hollow and rather pointless.

 

Take the film Suckerpunch, what a visual treat that was. Stylish, full of eye-catching imagery and technically impressive. But the film felt hollow as the story was poor. Despite film being a visual medium the story is necessary to bring flat visuals a greater meaning.

 

I believe that gaming is an interactive medium. Whilst a game with a great story is a good thing, primarily as an interactive medium games need to be interactive and focus on game play. That doesn't mean that games shouldn't have good plots, just that when a developer focuses on plot above interactivity they are not really playing to the strength of the medium for which they are creating content.

[Serebii]

Nope. I'm pure and simply pointing out bullshit. It's what I do.

By filling it with bullshit :p

 

Come on now. You need to use the whole spectrum when making a point like this, not just cherry pick a couple of niche titles and act as if it's the norm

[somme]

No it isn't nonsense.

 

Film, despite being a visual medium is based on telling a story. Watching a film that is a visual masterpiece - well directed, stylish and has a distinct artistic style is great, but without a good story it just feels hollow and rather pointless.

 

Take the film Suckerpunch, what a visual treat that was. Stylish, full of eye-catching imagery and technically impressive. But the film felt hollow as the story was poor. Despite film being a visual medium the story is necessary to bring flat visuals a greater meaning.

 

I believe that gaming is an interactive medium. Whilst a game with a great story is a good thing, primarily as an interactive medium games need to be interactive and focus on game play. That doesn't mean that games shouldn't have good plots, just that when a developer focuses on plot above interactivity they are not really playing to the strength of the medium for which they are creating content.

 

But even with film some people prefer good looking visuals and/or artsy stuff over plot. Some people care less about how it looks and prefer good story or lots of dialogue/no dialogue.

 

What one might see as a strength in the medium, another sees as weak. Same goes for gaming. Some people may prefer story driven, less action gameplay, others don't.

[Sheikah]

No it isn't nonsense.

 

Film, despite being a visual medium is based on telling a story. Watching a film that is a visual masterpiece - well directed, stylish and has a distinct artistic style is great, but without a good story it just feels hollow and rather pointless.

 

Take the film Suckerpunch, what a visual treat that was. Stylish, full of eye-catching imagery and technically impressive. But the film felt hollow as the story was poor. Despite film being a visual medium the story is necessary to bring flat visuals a greater meaning.

 

I believe that gaming is an interactive medium. Whilst a game with a great story is a good thing, primarily as an interactive medium games need to be interactive and focus on game play. That doesn't mean that games shouldn't have good plots, just that when a developer focuses on plot above interactivity they are not really playing to the strength of the medium for which they are creating content.

 

I think you're still missing the point here, as you're telling me at length about your preferences, and that's great and all...

 

But going back to what it was that I called out in your post as being nonsense, it was you saying that developers lost track of what they were doing by making games where story is the primary focus, which is clearly untrue. The developers made the game they intended. Just because it's not something you might like, many others did like it, and importantly, it was what they set out to make. And if it wasn't, how would you know? You can't make such a statement.

 

By filling it with bullshit :p

 

Come on now. You need to use the whole spectrum when making a point like this, not just cherry pick a couple of niche titles and act as if it's the norm

He said that any game where story was the primary focus meant the developers had lost track of what they were doing.

 

Pick any games you like where story dominates (I provided a list). There is no defence to the argument, I don't know why you're trying to make one.

[Mr-Paul]

I loved Telltale's The Walking Dead, but it really can't be compared to a Nintendo game. They're completely different in every way, and are trying to achieve different things. TWD is not really a game, it's an interactive story. It's brilliant at what it does, as are Nintendo games. They both have a valued place in today's market, and some people may enjoy one type more, and some people may enjoy the other more. It all comes down to personal preference.

 

While you can have games that just focus on the gameplay, and things like The Walking Dead which are completely about the story, what I think many here are arguing is that mainstream gaming shouldn't lose the gameplay element and drift towards becoming just an interactive story. Plot is an important device to keep people gripped to a game, but it shouldn't be at the expense of gameplay - they're called games, after all. The people who are less bothered by plot etc. don't want games to become less gamey.

 

The likes of Phoenix Wright etc. are an interesting one, as you could say it's the story that makes you play it, but it still has a strong gameplay element - the solving of cases. It requires you to do something, and is non-linear in the investigation stages - it's down to you to work out where to go, what to show to people etc. so it's not like you're just watching a story play out.

[dazzybee]

I know you said more but if that is truly what you believe then I can say nothing more than that you are wrong and further talks on this probably aren't going to go anywhere if you're completely convinced on that.

 

Nobody is going to make such simple links as 'commercial success automatically means best game/console ever' like you are doing. That said, there are clear patterns that can be observed based on success and widespread adoption of media (which ultimately boils down to making games that captivate and engage with the modern audience). It's not wrong to look at those in closer detail and make those links.

 

You said Kinect sales were meaningless when it was crazy successful, you said wii sales did;t mean anything in terms of what gamers wanted/you wanted or whatever; lots of people did. But now it's really important. It isn't. It isn't a judgement statement on how good something is.

 

Do you think apples success means everyone should do what they do?

 

I find it bizarre that you would tie the two together.

Edited July 31, 2015 by Rummy
Automerged Doublepost

[Rummy]

I'm fed up saying this but I will say it again.

 

Stop attacking people personally.

 

Focus on the arguments being made and leave the person behind them alone. Keep it up and there'll be infractions.

[Sheikah]

It's funny how people seem to know exactly what I said yet never have any fucking proof of me ever saying it.

 

What I've said about the Wii is that it was short term success that worked because it had such mass appeal. And well done Nintendo for making something so appealing. That said, I think the success went to their heads and they tailored their entire focus on making something 'alternate', and stepping away from the competition. Ultimately the low power 'quirky' approach adopted as a result of the Wii, I think, has led to their unfavourable situation right now.

[Grazza]

Urgh @Fierce_LiNk, you've just made me long for the Nintendo stories of old with the likes of Ocarina of Time and Metroid Prime.

 

I actually think this is a more pertinent point than the "story vs. gameplay" debate (not that I'm knocking it).

 

The Wii U hasn't had a Metroid or Zelda game.

 

It's amazing when you think of it. The issue for me is not really whether a game has a good story, or how it's told - it's more that Nintendo has focused on very, very simple games recently. It may well be that The Witcher 3 sets new standards, but Nintendo hasn't even attempted to match its own standards.

[Serebii]

I actually think this is a more pertinent point than the "story vs. gameplay" debate (not that I'm knocking it).

 

The Wii U hasn't had a Metroid or Zelda game.

 

It's amazing when you think of it. The issue for me is not really whether a game has a good story, or how it's told - it's more that Nintendo has focused on very, very simple games recently. It may well be that The Witcher 3 sets new standards, but Nintendo hasn't even attempted to match its own standards.

Be fair. It's not like they're not working on a Wii U Zelda game...

[Clownferret]

commercial success is important to the people selling the game, game play is important to the people playing the game, it's that simple.

To claim a game is good or bad based on it's sales is beyond absurd.

 

Regarding the argument about story vs game play, game play wins every day and twice on Sundays. They are games and games are to be played not watched.

[Goafer]

commercial success is important to the people selling the game, game play is important to the people playing the game, it's that simple.

 

Well, it's not. What if your favourite games developer went bust because its game didn't sell? What if a sequel depends on the games success? Both scenarios benefit the gamer if the game sells well.

 

Regarding the argument about story vs game play, game play wins every day and twice on Sundays. They are games and games are to be played not watched.

 

Again, for you maybe. I personally would rather have a story that effects me long after I've played it than a game that is only great when I am playing it. For example, Rocket League is a great game, but I prefer Witcher because it has a lasting effect.

[Pestneb]

Regarding the argument about story vs game play, game play wins every day and twice on Sundays. They are games and games are to be played not watched.

 

Surely a similar approach can be taking to cinema. If I want a gripping story I will grab a book... I want more explosions, better looking sets, stunts and more explosions! I want CGI that looks even more real than reality, not this plot rubbish...

 

Games can have an entertaining story as well as fun gameplay.

I think criticising either side of the spectrum is silly, it's like arguing which genre is best, shooters or platformers - it's purely subjective. I actually don't know if I have a preference one way or the other personally.

 

I think if there is a story I want it to be entertaining - either simply or with interesting plot twists, but I would prefer no real story development over a contrived piece to tick a box.

Similarly, when there are gameplay elements I want them to work well and solidly.

[Kounan]

I preffer gameplay.

 

I also like a good story, but for me a good story for a game is different compared to a good story forba book, or a movie.

 

Sometimes I feel there is to much of the story, to many options, to many dialogs, to much walking around and not doing anything because I have to talk to someone, who will send me to someone else. It gets boring amd to long, as I want to play more and not watch a movie.

[Daft]

If I had to pick...I guess I'd pick gameplay over story. But really, the gameplay would have to be detrimental to the experience to really bring a good story down. Relatively vanilla gameplay in combination with wonderful storytelling can create something as stunning as Uncharted 2. On the flip-side, technically brilliant gameplay can be utterly cold without a compelling narrative and compelling narratives are so rare in games. That's how I feel about most Nintendo games, tbh. Sure, the gameplay is stunning, but why should I care? Why does it deserve my incredibly valuable time if it's not going to try and connect with me on anything other than a mechanical level?

 

I picked up Far Cry 4 this year. Never really been a massive FC fan but I thought I'd give it a shot. And what a fucking antagonist. Absolutely superb. There's a bit at the end where you have the opportunity to kill him, but you know what, he was so charming, so well written, that I just let him escape – I had my finger on the trigger, I started to squeeze...and then I stopped myself. And that was a moment where I connected with a game and it was on a narrative level, it could only have been on a narrative level because that connection was borne out of a choice that was the result of hours upon hours of story - a story that all took place within the confines of arguably very unremarkable gameplay (that was a lot of fun, but there was literally nothing I hadn't seen before in it).

 

Gameplay is overrated.

 

The game I'm most looking forward to this year? Firewatch. Visually superb and narratively driven. And I'm pretty sure all you do is walk around and look at things.

 

[Hero-of-Time]

Totally agree with you on the Far Cry 4 stuff. It was such an amazing moment.

[Kounan]

Gameplay is overrated.

 

It's not, the same way a good story is not overrated, it depends what you like.

[Kav]

It depends what the gameplay brings and what the story brings.

 

I can see @Daft's point about Far Cry 4, but on the same hand Super Mario Galaxy may as well have had a non-existent story but it's still one of the most joyous experiences I've had gaming thank to the gameplay.

 

Swings and roundabouts really I guess. I just prefer gameplay... but I would like more narrative in some Nintendo games.

[Glen-i]

Interesting discussion.

 

I think I'd have to side with the story.

 

For example, Final Fantasy 8, which I first played a few months ago, had a story that at times was pretty damn good, but at others completely threw me out of the immersion. In the end, it kinda hurt the experience.

 

On the other hand, there's the Pokemon Mystery Dungeon series, which I think have marvellous stories. A bit corny at times, but there's something that just draws me in.

Maybe it's the already familiar characters suddenly getting personalities, maybe it's the surprisingly dark route the stories tend to take, but I love it.

 

So yeah, a decent story definitely helps me enjoy a game. (With obvious exceptions, I'm not expecting much from a Mario game.)

But it most definitely is a double-edged sword.

[Serebii]

Interesting discussion.

 

I think I'd have to side with the story.

 

For example, Final Fantasy 8, which I first played a few months ago, had a story that at times was pretty damn good, but at others completely threw me out of the immersion. In the end, it kinda hurt the experience.

 

On the other hand, there's the Pokemon Mystery Dungeon series, which I think have marvellous stories. A bit corny at times, but there's something that just draws me in.

Maybe it's the already familiar characters suddenly getting personalities, maybe it's the surprisingly dark route the stories tend to take, but I love it.

 

So yeah, a decent story definitely helps me enjoy a game. (With obvious exceptions, I'm not expecting much from a Mario game.)

But it most definitely is a double-edged sword.

Funny, I'd include Mystery Dungeon as an example for my point. A game with a fantastic story which is entirely let down by its gameplay.

[Glen-i]

Funny, I'd include Mystery Dungeon as an example for my point. A game with a fantastic story which is entirely let down by its gameplay.

 

Opinions and all, but you already know I love the gameplay of the series.

[Serebii]

Opinions and all, but you already know I love the gameplay of the series.

Yeah but you're clearly insane :p

[somme]

I haven't played one in a few years but I always remember enjoying the worlds of Paper Mario, the first two. The story was always pretty funny and the world fleshed out with lots of lovely, humorous characters. Mario games can have good stories, just, not the main ones.

[Fused King]

I haven't played one in a few years but I always remember enjoying the worlds of Paper Mario, the first two. The story was always pretty funny and the world fleshed out with lots of lovely, humorous characters. Mario games can have good stories, just, not the main ones.

 

Yeah, it's ironic that a NINTENDO (Intelligent Systems) Game with one of the most intricate stories and story lines is a Mario game. Paper Mario and the Thousand Year Door to be exact.

 

I mean, they dabbled in the whole A.I. and Human relationship before the movie Her ever did.

Super Paper Mario also has a very poetic love story going on.

[Retro_Link]

If we went back 5-10 years I don't think we'd even be having a gameplay vs story debate. Until the Wii maybe I don't think you'd have even made the distinction with Nintendo, they just created fantastic character driven games that delivered on both.

 

Maybe they made better use of their mascots than they arguably do now.

 

It's only really from the Wii onwards where in some cases, and increasingly so over the years that Nintendo has arguably focused more on gameplay and 'experiences' more, in trying to create more wider reaching games.