Look at the old NES games. People did not play those for the graphics, they played them for the gameplay and the story. This is mostly applying to games with story-driven gameplay however, and I think it still applies today. Lately, mainstream developers have been focusing too much on the graphics, and not enough on the story. If all you want to see are nice graphics, then just watch a movie. Most games are all about story-driven gameplay.
| |
I think a lot of the old NES games got by because they were just so new. If you look at the popular games (Mario, Castlevania, Zelda) they didn't have an intricate story, so much as they were just easy to play and had a goal.
However, the best games of today tend to have immersive stories. | |
Multiverse7 wrote:
Look at the old NES games. People did not play those for the graphics, they played them for the gameplay and the story. This is mostly applying to games with story-driven gameplay however, and I think it still applies today. Lately, mainstream developers have been focusing too much on the graphics, and not enough on the story. If all you want to see are nice graphics, then just watch a movie. Most games are all about story-driven gameplay. NES games Lel NES games were popular because they had fun gameplay, which is ideal. | |
Just try to imagine Final Fantasy, Dragon Warrior, or even Castlevania and Zelda without their stories. Would those games even work after that? The story is like the heart or driving force of these kinds of games, but it's not easily apparent because the power of the gameplay tends to drown it out. I know that gameplay is the most significant factor in these games, but if you were to completely remove their storylines, there would be a very dramatic and noticeable difference. I would get a bad feeling when playing a game that has no soul.
| |
Gameplay > Story (if relevant) > Art Style > Graphics > Sound
Rushnut wrote: But why would you ever put story above graphics? In a game where the storyline is relevant, why would you not put it above graphics? I can handle a game with poor/low quality graphics (as long as they are consistent), but if the storyline is terrible then I won't play it. I fail to see why your example is relevant, perhaps I am missing something? I didn't see anyone say that graphics were not needed, just that the story should have a bigger priority. | |
Depends on the type of game really..
RPG Story > Intuitive Gameplay that's easy to grasp while being complex > Art > Sound a deathmatch type of game (like a shooter) Art > Gameplay > Sound > Story Strategy Intuitive Gameplay that's easy to grasp while being complex > Story > Art > Sound The reason for RPG having story first is really..not needed to be explained. The reason shooters have art first is because...well, the gameplay in every shooter is going to be pretty similar at the core regardless of what you do. So if you have really great art with a shooter, it'll do a lot better. | |
It definitely depends on the genre of the game.
If it is a game type that requires a story, then story trumps all. For most other cases, gameplay is king (I don't care how pretty/ugly something looks, it has to be fun first and foremost) If it is a game that doesn't necessarily require a story, but is improved by having one, then story comes next to gameplay. Then, visuals and sounds come last, as the icing on the cake. Yes, you are correct that having a visual representation of some kind (I'm including text) is a requirement for it to even be a "video game", but once you've at least satisfied the bare minimum visually, the art becomes much less important. What most of us are just assuming that the game has "art". We're basing our importance ranking on how important it is to improve the art vs. improving other areas. | |
I asked for your own personal philosophy, not what makes a good game necessarily. That came out wrong, to clarify, one of my all time favourite games is Heavy Rain, what they did with that was excellent in my opinion.
If I were making a game though, I'd put story miles behind I did everything else because I'm sure that a game with great gameplay will always be fun. | |
I agree, games need good gameplay, and decent graphics for today's standards, and the music is always a must. However, if I'm going out and just whacking at s**t with a sword and casting spells without actually being given a motive for doing so, the game will get pretty boring pretty fast.
Imagine Skyrim with no story: You start off in some town. You're not a prisoner, because that would be part of a storyline. There are Dragons spawning everywhere. There's a story to how they're spawning, but that's irrelevant, because you never get involved in it. There is no Thalmor, but the Civil War is going on (and you don't know why), and all of the guild quests are kinda crappy. The Companions questline just involves you killing a bunch of giants and trolls until you become Harbinger(and Kodlak just disappears for some reason). The College of Winterhold just involves you learning every spell in the game until you become Archmage. Thieves' Guild is just stealing crap over and over again so you can get more gold. Maybe become guildmaster. | |
GamerMania wrote:
Imagine Skyrim with no story: That is actually why I really dislike Skyrim, beacuse it has too much story and not enough gameplay, and even then the story is pretty bad. | |
Only thing I couldn't tolerate in Skyrim was the exploration. I don't care about exploring. It was annoying have to walk around for 5 minutes just to find something new to do.
Dragon Quest 8, my favorite RPG, had exploration, but there were quicker incentives as well as action thrown in to make it not even feel like dull exploring which is why it was more tolerable. What I mean is, if you walked around for 10 minutes in DQ8, you would've had enough fights to level up all your party members twice, enough gold to upgrade their gear, you may have found some rare item in a chest, and possibly even had a boss fight ( or if you didn't, the boss fight wasn't too far away ) 10 minutes of walking around in Skyrim? Probably one meaningless encounter with a group of bandits and maybe a spellbook you found in some abandoned tower. Then you spend another 10 minutes walking from the abandoned tower to a town, only so you can roam around the town for 10 minutes, listen to NPCs ramble for 10 minutes, and then walk another 10 minutes to a dungeon one of the NPCs told you to go to so you can FINALLY HAVE FUN. Jesus. | |
create environment | |
I must admit I am an avid fan of Dwarf Fortress, and Cataclysm-DDA.
I'd very much say that I don't play those for the graphics, but the story that they manage to create. | |
Personally I prefer the game play over everything else. I like to clearly define what a player will be doing in my game first. Then build upon it by making it fun/exciting/interesting.
I also like to try to incorporate multiple uses for game mechanics. Axe wielder who is also adept at cutting down trees f:ex. I do find that most people are terribly, and hopelessly shallow. To make matters even worse, they often times are very ignorant with their snap judgments. I sit and decide for myself what kinda games I want to make and realistically decide if it's something other people would be interested in. Or other times I make the types of games I'd like to play over a long term, since I find most games to be wash rinse repeat of the same old things. I enjoy adding in variety, and a reason to continue playing games. Which brings up a whole new realm of thinking. Imagine creating a game based on what you want players to do, or accomplish. Or said a better way, pose a question and then answer it with your game design. "What's a good way to keep a player constantly returning for more of my game?" And then coming up with an answer that applies to your game--and implement it. Based on that you could ask a multitude of questions- important ones that game devs struggle with everyday, and structure something that fulfills or answers each one of those questions. Things like "Why would someone want to try this?" "Why would they want to continue playing this?" "What type of fulfillment will a player take away from this game?" If all that is too deep for you, scale it to something simple like-"How can I make a player have insane amounts of fun when playing my game?" And go from there, in short I believe that developing a game is a form of communication, an art form, as well as a past time and hobby. Those are some of the thoughts that enter my head when I decide what I want to work on. | |
Imagine creating a game based on what you want players to do, or accomplish. If all that is too deep for you, scale it to something simple like-"How can I make a player have insane amounts of fun when playing my game?" That all sounded borderline offensive but instead I'll just laugh because you're obviously new to game design. But at least you're on the right track, good job. | |
I have to say, it definitely depends on the game. I'm a very story-driven player, so that comes out when I put together ideas for games. All the attributes are important in my eyes.
Graphics have to be bearable, they can't be painful to look at, or draw too much attention in any single spot. Music has to fit the area, else you feel skeptical about what's going on. The story has to continually flow, not giving people the chance to sit back and figure everything out so they can get bored and quit. The mechanics have to be fun, so that you enjoy what you're doing. I like complexity in mechanics, but I like it coupled with easy to use. Let the code spice things up, save a few parts that require interaction, else it gets too easy. In the end, I don't value any one aspect over the other. If something is lacking, it bugs me regardless. | |
Kitsueki wrote:
The story has to continually flow, not giving people the chance to sit back and figure everything out so they can get bored and quit. I completely and entirely disagree. Flowing story is boring and predictable, the good stories are the ones that throw an anchor at your face and go HAH BET YOU DIDN'T EXPECT THAT. But only if they do it well, obviously. | |
Isn't that what you are doing?