Story in games?

[Drakron]

Get a room you two!

[Musopticon?]

Oh please; can't I stab members without interference nowadays? Pffft.

[Llyranor]

Read the rules. Stabbing members will get you a fair warning from our humanitarian mods.

[Calax]

@Meta: my earlier posts were based upon the education I recieved in the Art Institute of Portlands Game Art and Design Major. But Don't go there, it's poorly administrated.

[jaguars4ever]

Oh please; can't I stab members without interference nowadays? Pffft.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stabbing? I'm not sure Gabrielle's into the whole dominatrix thing.

[Musopticon?]

 

Made my morning.

[Walsingham]

making any product is also a question of playing to your strengths. If you've got smart creative people then angling for better stories may be more productive than trying to outdo the big math and money stables on graphics.

 

It's like asymmetric warfare. And tacos.

[J.E. Sawyer]

1) I hate the 'average gamer' notion driving game development. Just like I hate the average filmgoer driving film development. No-one ever made a classic film that continues to sell, or generates a franchise by pandering. They did it by setting out to do something extra-ordinary. Viz the diff between the first Matrix film, and the later ones.

In my opinion, all three Splinter Cell games were more well-executed and polished than any of the Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Fallout, or Neverwinter titles. They have a small scope, but UbiSoft (both Montr

[Guest Fishboot]

Insightful crap.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Aren't you supposed to aggrandize our archaic tastes and facilitate our feelings of superiority? What kind of RPG dev are you?

[Musopticon?]

And saying that the Splinter Cell games "require planning and dexterity(and), often have multiple paths to completion" is crap. There was a pipe; you had 'use' button and jump button. The End.

[Cantousent]

I think it's a tough comparison in terms of polish. It doesn't seem to me that fps, rts, or other titles are quite so burdened as an RPG. After all, most of the story in an RPG must unfold during actual gameplay. In other titles, cut scenes can do the vast majority, if not all, of the heavy lifting.

 

Don't get me wrong, I play more fps than RPG titles these days. There are simply more quality fps titles to be found. Nevertheless, that limited "scope" is undoubtedly a great benefit to creating a tight story. ...And it's easy to keep the dialogue under control when there's less of it.

[J.E. Sawyer]

And saying that the Splinter Cell games "require planning and dexterity(and), often have multiple paths to completion" is crap. There was a pipe; you had 'use' button and jump button. The End.

Statements like this fly against what most Splinter Cell missions required. Either you didn't like the games and are simplifying them to the point of absurdity or you saw/heard about someone else playing the games and are making shallow observations.

 

In the first Splinter Cell, I remember a room that was very similar to a science lab. The room prior to it was a well-lit small chamber with flourescent lights overhead, but had no guards in it. The lab had six to eight overhead lights, a large flickering floor lamp, and computer monitors that gave off a tiny amount of light. A pipe ran from the near door to the far left-side corner of the room. About five seconds after either entering the room or using an optic cable under the door, three guards entered the next room (a sort of cryogenics area), spoke for a few moments, and entered the lab. They all made one pass of the lab, stopped, spoke some more, and then entered a new movement pattern. One guard left and the other two stayed, walking on new paths.

 

If you just tried to plow through the room, they would see you pretty quickly and possibly kill you. If you fired your silenced pistol at the lights, they would hear either your pistol or the glass breaking depending on their position. In the tight quarters of the lab, they would often find you. If you hopped up on the pipe and just started shimmying non-stop, they would hear you. To get through the room, I opened the door and before they came in, shot out a far light. They entered, talked, noticed the broken light, searched "over there" and went back into their routines. I climbed up the pipe, did timed shimmying across and did an inverted shot at a far light to distract them. I dropped down in the far corner (where I had shot out the first light) waited for one guard to walk by, and knocked him out. Then I crept into the second pool of darkness I had created and knocked out the second guard. Other people handled the area in different ways. I know this area very well because it took me about six tries to successfully pass it. Also, I don't know if you played Chaos Theory, but there were actually multiple divergent paths to complete many maps. The bank is a good example.

 

Which Splinter Cell games did you play, and to what extent?

[alanschu]

I agree with Sawyer that the Splinter Cell games were all very interesting stories, and an absolute blast to play.

 

Chaos Theory had production values through the roof, and was easily the most enjoyable single player Splinter Cell experience out there. The mercs-vs-spies multiplayer in Pandora Tomorrow was a great idea (although I still think spies can kill mercs too easily...I don't like playing deathmatch I like playing cat and mouse), and the coop mode is INSANE fun. Nothing like hanging your partner down a vent Mission: Impossible style so he can hack a keypad to get you into the room with the laser grid, only to have one guy disable the grid so the other could run across, so that HE could disable the grid for the original guy.

 

Anyone who doesn't think that Splinter Cell (especially Chaos Theory) would be anything more than a mere B-Movie I don't think has really played the game. There are already movies that are similar in story like Patriot Games (Tom Clancy, so I guess it's not a big surprise), and I wouldn't call Patriot Games a B-Movie. In fact I was surprised it took THIS long for there to be a movie about Splinter Cell, given that the game just screams for a movie.

 

 

In Chaos Theory, you got to hear from much more Grimsdotter, as well as Redding, and you found out that those two are pretty interesting characters too. I particularly enjoyed the bantering that Fisher shared with Grimsdotter.

[Sargallath Abraxium]

...seems every few months in the last, oh, forever, this has been brought up at least once...and the answer always be the same; attention spans o' the average gamer has dwindled ta the point o' "click, click, click, boom", so why would dev houses bother with PS:T-esque storylines in yer "average" game???...not make much sense ta spend soo much time tryin' ta recreate "the greatest Epic ever told" when most ain't payin' any more attention than what graphics maelstrom theys git ta see next...makes good business sense ta build a game ta "the masses" instead o' a small percentage o' "hardcore fans", does it not??? (and yes, I hates sayin' it but it be true)...Dia-blows set the bar, peoples; an' said bar's gonna stay set fer a long time, more's the pity... <_<

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

[metadigital]

...

Similarly, the gaming market has grown and changed.  CRPGs used to be a strong market with a large representation among the greater gaming crowd.  CRPGs can still sell well, but they aren't the powerhouse they once were.  Developers might survive on CRPGs alone, but publishers cannot.  And with many developers, they have to either differentiate from the competition or be "best of breed".  Development costs are too high now for devs/pubs to do otherwise.

 

In summary, if you want good stories in games, I believe you can find them all over the place in many different genres.  If you want good stories in a specific type of CRPG, you are going to have to look through a huge number of titles that don't qualify -- because a lot of people like playing those "other" games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's Ford that owns Porsche now, isn't it? Just like they own Jaguar and Rolls Royce?

 

For those of you in the cheap seats, I am making a serious comparison between the consolidation of the car industry and the upcoming rationalisation of the gaming industry.

 

Taking Mr Sawyer's point about specialisation being a dangerous strategy for a game producer, that does not preclude a developer from specialising. Or even having a few specialisations, but being excellent at one or two.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Porsche was very closely linked with VAG for a while, but most of those ties have been severed -- sort of. As in the beginning, Porsche is still dominantly controlled by the greater Porsche family. Ferdinand Porsche developed the VW Beetle for Hitler and his son, Ferry Porsche, developed the 356 Speedster. Descendants of that "line" have had a lot of control over VAG and Porsche for quite a while. Ferdinand Piech, the nephew of Ferry Porsche, was the head of Volkswagen for almost ten years.

 

Anyway, specialization can work for a developer, but it can also lead to blandness.

[metadigital]

...

Anyway, specialization can work for a developer, but it can also lead to blandness.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Aye, there are many submerged rocks near the coastline of plenty; let us hope that the great lighthouse of wisdom keeps the good ships safe long enough to deposit their eagerly awaited cargoes ...

 

Pray tell, Mr Sawyer, what is OE's position on specialisation? Do they intend to broaden their developments into other genres, or keep to excellence at cRPGs?

[Musopticon?]

I take my statement back.

 

Let's just say that seeing "choice" mentioned with the first 2 Splinter Cell games gave me a fit over how gamers nowadays are satisfied with so on-rails-like, scripted and cornered games. Granted, the Splinter Cell games were enjoyble, sort of a movie-like experience. I didn't however like the forced restrictions of alarms, the obstacle courses titled levels, etc; SC and PT "featured". For godsakes look at precursor stealth games; Thief, Deus Ex, Metal Gear, Tenchu, and how they handled choice and freedom.

[alanschu]

The forced restrictions on alarms was stupid in the originals.

 

Chaos Theory has done away with that...and even done away with alarms causing mission failure (except when it's most prudent).

[metadigital]

So Splinter Cell is good, then?

 

I still have a copy of it bundled with the Mission Pack, which I haven't installed as yet ... hmmm ...

[Walsingham]

I haven't played Splinter cell, but I've played some of the precursors Musopticon mentions.

 

I like technical challenges, and they certainly sell. But I'll not bother doing them unless they are chocolate coated in story goodness. Otheriwse it's just like doing a very badly paid job. Where's the reward for getting through the door, or catching the helicopter. In several games I am just left thinking "If this was me I'd have gone looking for a more interesting case to pursue."

 

As an aside on technical challenges and being straitjacketed I always remember something an old CIA operative said. He was asked in an exam how he would calculate the height of a specific building, and was given a barometer. He replied instantly that he would go to City Hall, and ask politely for the building records. If the building records were not available they would certainly record tha architect's name for legal reasons. He would locate the architect in the phone book, and offer him a shiny new baraometer if he would tell the operative how tall his building was. Either solution would be accurate to within a foot, unlike the standard solution of guaging air pressure.

 

Most really top class work is done by this kind of thinking, not trying to shimmy across ceilings. The only game I've found that comes close on that account is Hitman. Which also has a cool story. Although I wouldn't say the story was good.

[Musopticon?]

Eh, I forgot Hitman. Thanks Walsh.

[metadigital]

Two words: Max Payne ... err three words!

 

Three words: Max Payne 2 ... good story can make a game into a classic ... and bullet time ... damn!

 

Two things can make a classic game, ...

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Three words: Max Payne 2 ... good story can make a game into a classic ... and bullet time ... damn!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For some reason, I could never get into the story of Payne 2. Max Payne will remain a good and well told story to me, as well as a good game. But the sequel just seems to try and surpass it and largely fail. Gameplay wise there's little to keep me interested, with the exception of one or two levels (the construction site where you team up with and control Mona is a blast, for instance). The addition of a more complex physics system is nice but rarely lifts up, or matters much. The game also felt smaller.

 

And the story is just FUBAR. Vinnie alive? Vlad a villain? He was too much of an endearing and somewhat quirky character in the prequel, definietely not villain material as far as I'm concerned. Mona letting down her guard? And how many times does Max come close to dying? It creates some tension in the first game, but seeing him escape death over and over just feels forced. He's a badass, we get the point already. Stop pumping him full of lead and breaking his ribs, for god's sake.

[metadigital]

Ha! I didn't play the first one, so I came to the series new at Two. It was a little silly that Max kept miraculously reviving when seemingly so full of holes, but how is that any more far-fetched than "eating" a health pack (or whatever the character does to them ...) in any of your brand-leading shooters, like Doom and Half-Life?

 

Sure, I would have liked it to be a little longer, but nothing's perfect ...