[Stunaep]

I've recently played two shooters. One is Max Payne 2. The other is Halo.

Max Payne I played straight from start to the middle of the second chapter. Halo... well, I'm still not past But I Don't Want To Ride The Elevator.

And now I realise what the problem with Halo is. It's the Matrix syndrome. At one point, it forgets about storytelling and focuses on the action. You've got to gun down literally thousands of Covenant and Flood before you get to the next story-part. Granted, the cut-scene then lasts for a good five minutes, but still. The Assault on the Control room was overlong, and underdeveloped. The level went on, and on, gunning through endless copies of the same room, without getting anything new in the story part.

Max Payne 2, however opens up new pieces of the story every moment you play. The cutscenes, the graphic novel parts, the TV shows that reflect your own destiny. Well thought, well executed, and engaging. And no gunning through copies of the same room, that was oh-so-dominant in Halo.

Another example of good story-telling replaced with more commercial profitability is the NOLF series. NOLF 1 was witty, funny, and well-developed. The long conversations between Cate and Mr. Smith & Jones opened up the characters well, while still remaining clever. NOLF 2 made them into charicatures. Not to mention that I would have liked to see more of the american General and his Black counterpart.

So, what kind of action/storytelling balance do you like in games?

[kasperl]

storytelling should be the most important in games, action, off course is important, but it should be an means to an end, not the purpose. itself. if i play a agme, i want to be pulled into it's story. a challenge adds to the experience, but i don't want to be forced to do too much work to learn the tale. it might sound lasy, but if i want to practice my shooting skills, i'll play AA. if i want to practice flying, i'll play some multi FS. the single player campaign should be focused on the story, not the extreme challenge. of course, it get's boring if it's too easy, but the balance should always be to provide a small challenge, and enough story.

[Odyssey]

[color=cc9900]'Getting the balance right' is something that has been largely negated in modern games, instead giving way to the purpose of shooting stuff that also happens to look all shiny and high-detail while it's being shot at.
Case in point for a good game: Half Life. It's got such a good balance of action and storyline that you can enjoy it immensely even with all the cheats turned on. By contrast, a lot of games, if you turn cheats on, go flat, because they have no substance to them.
I've never played Halo, but I can judge by the general audience that it is aimed for that it's not much more than rampant violence without a purpose.[/color]

[Setekh]

Originally posted by kasperl
storytelling should be the most important in games, action, off course is important, but it should be an means to an end, not the purpose. itself. if i play a agme, i want to be pulled into it's story.

I agree that a great story is very important to a game, but I completely disagree with storytelling being the most important thing in a game. If I want a great story, I'll go read a book. I play games specifically in order to interact with said stories - not to have the story told to me (a la storytelling), but to enact out part of it myself. Some excellent games are completely devoid of story - take virtually any console fighting game - yet are very enjoyable games. I don't think storytelling should be the most important thing at all.

[kasperl]

perhaps i phrased it wrong, the story is the main part, but participating in it should be a good part too. i do sometimes enjoy story-less games, but i'd rather see something with a good single player campaign, and a skirmish mode for the mindless stuff.

[Turnsky]

Gameplay + Story + good design (graphics is moot IMO) = a top game in my books.. take 'Nomad Soul' for instance that had a helluva good story to it..as for halo, i liked it..


this is why i like some RPG's 'cause you /play/ a major Role in a story, and it actually forms around your character in the game...('cept Hack & Slash....but i like those too )

[Stunaep]

I'll add this: I like to think of games as another form of storytelling. In books you read about the story (interesting, how books are still the best form of storytelling, is it not), in movies you see the story, and in games you are in the story. Which is what makes FS great - everything happens around you, rarely in cutscenes. Same with NOLF, Max Payne and others.

But definetely not with Halo.

[Gloriano]

Gameplay + Story + good design those make game fun

[karajorma]

I think gameplay is the most important thing in a game by far. I've played and enjoyed games that have no storyline and my favourite game of all time has a storyline you can write on the back of a postcard

However storyline becomes important if you're playing a game where a good storyline could have been added and hasn't. You can't put much of a storyline into a beat 'em up or racing game but Half-life shows how you can put a storyline into an FPS and do it well.

Once important aspect however that is often overlooked is though is that the storyline should never make the player do something he doesn't want to do.

When I compare FS2 against Wing Commander : Prophecy this becomes readily apparent. FS2 is the better game by far but a large part of the reason why I only played WC:P once while I'm still playing FS2 now is cause it has a better storyline. WC:P often felt like I was being led from cutscene to cutscene with my character often doing things I wouldn't have done.
 Having the anonymous alpha one as the main character helped prevent the player from ever feeling like they were being railroaded.

[Setekh]

Originally posted by Stunaep
(interesting, how books are still the best form of storytelling, is it not)

Agreed. Books are the bomb.

[diamondgeezer]

Someone set us up the book?

(sorry)

[phreak]

great story is only made better with well-placed action.  IW2 excels at this.  FS focuses on both too, but the game is more action based.  i think games with lots of action, but no story like doom or quake are good if i just want to take my mind of stuff and blow up ****

[Ace]

Originally posted by Stunaep
I've recently played two shooters. One is Max Payne 2. The other is Halo.

Max Payne I played straight from start to the middle of the second chapter. Halo... well, I'm still not past But I Don't Want To Ride The Elevator.

And now I realise what the problem with Halo is. It's the Matrix syndrome. At one point, it forgets about storytelling and focuses on the action. You've got to gun down literally thousands of Covenant and Flood before you get to the next story-part. Granted, the cut-scene then lasts for a good five minutes, but still. The Assault on the Control room was overlong, and underdeveloped. The level went on, and on, gunning through endless copies of the same room, without getting anything new in the story part.

Max Payne 2, however opens up new pieces of the story every moment you play. The cutscenes, the graphic novel parts, the TV shows that reflect your own destiny. Well thought, well executed, and engaging. And no gunning through copies of the same room, that was oh-so-dominant in Halo...

I agree with the statement on Halo, I have Halo PC but not X-Box. The level everyone on X-Box claimed was tedious (The Library) I thought was fast-paced and decent but the Assault on the Control Room was a boring map with fighting over one nicely done bridge across a canyon three times.

Halo seems to be one great 20 hour game, that they cut and pasted it up to 30 hours, at the cost of the game.


Max Payne 2 does an excellent job having smaller substories that relate to the overall game such as the Descent Into Madness TV show, the ads, etc.


Everyone talks about Half-Life as the prodigy of gaming, however people seem to forget the games that first pioneered story and environment puzzle based gameplay such as Ultima Underworld, System Shock, Hexen, Hexen II.

[TrashMan]

Outcast...mmmmmm...now THAT was a good game...
Baldur's Gate 1&2
X- Beyond the fronteer
Freespace 1&2
Freelancer
Splinter Cell
System Shock 2
Half-Life
X-Wing Alliance

etc....

[Ashrak]

outcast WAS a good game unfortunately it had to run on software only

[magatsu1]

I agree with karajorma. Playability is key.

Story driven games, such as System Shock2 are great, but sometimes I just want a quick 10 minute blast and don't want to fart around watching cut-scenes and listening to dialogue.
Story driven games also loose something after the first time of playing all the way through.

I actually quite liked "Assualt on the Control Room", especially in Co-op mode.
And I never understood the fuss over Half Life.

[Hippo]

AOCR is one of my favorite levels... Maybe because i play Halo daily, or because I read the books, but the storyline seems clear as black and white to me...

[Stunaep]

That's why I have UT2003

[Flaser]

The first time I played Halo on Normal I was often frustrated, 'casue the game was hard an consisted of fighting alone.....unitl I did it on Legendary.
The difference was that battles couldn't be won with my skills alone - tactics had to be used. But my options were often limited - so I finally realised teh stupidity of the way I played Halo. I was trying to kill everyone - instead carrying out the objectives.

When I realised that the whole game took on a fast paced nature, since more than once I simply dashed between enemies, or used new routes that otherwise I thought stupid - like the moment I reached the chasm during ASCR. - I jumped! ....and skid down the wall. I got the map in less than 1 minute.

Still Halo lacks somehat in storytelling, but IMHO the atmosphere makes up for it - especially teh AI of the enemy.

Such games are IMHO Homeworld, HW2 and many other mission based titles.

I like them, but I play only a couple of them. The reason? Gameplay.

[magatsu1]

*still waiting for the Half Life backlash*