[Stormkeeper]

So I was reading a Gamespot article about storytelling in games. And I started to think; what did I prefer in a game? All along I figured I'd pick story over gameplay but after thinking a while, I realised that's not true because I like Perimeter, and that thing has a crappy ass story.

So I figured I'd ask everyone around here; if you had to choose between and excellent, stellar game with revolutionary gameplay and very polished but a mediocre story, or one with a excellent story but lacklustre gameplay, which would you choose? And why?

[Fury]

You cannot enjoy a story if you have to fight poor gameplay. Hence gamepay is more important than story. You can enjoy a game with excellent gameplay but poor story, but you cannot usually enjoy a game with excellent story but poor gameplay.

[Stormkeeper]

Hmmm. Point. Then what if the gameplay was just average, nothing fancy, just tons of been-there-done-that. But the story is fantastic. Would you still go for the one with excellent gameplay but weak story?

[The E]

Personally, I would go for the one with the interesting story. As they said on the evilest site of the internet, tropes are not bad.

[Fury]

As long as "been-there-done-that" works and you can enjoy playing the game, then I would choose improving story over gameplay.

If "been-there-done-that" gameplay equals frustration, then gameplay over story.

[Mongoose]

What Fury said, basically.  If the gameplay is at least passable and completely functional, I'll take the game that has the fantastic story.  Psychonauts is a classic example of this principle: the gameplay is essentially not much different from your standard 3D platformer, but it's the great characters you meet and ridiculously awesome environments you find yourself in that turned it into the universally-praised gem that it is.  However, if you're talking about a game with a fantastic story yet just-about-broken mechanics, I'll most likely stay far away.  A game like Serious Sam has essentially no story to speak of, but that doesn't stop it from having ridiculously fun gameplay.

[Stormkeeper]

So if the gameplay was run of the mill, but was backed up by a spectecular story, you'd play that over the one with little to no story but unbelievably awesome gameplay?

[Colonol Dekker]

Gameplay or story?
 
It depends on the game, TF2 and asteroids are great for gameplay even tetris is more addictive than crack. But Zork and the like excell at storyplaying. Finding a median between the two sometimes works, sometimes it doesn't. It just depends on personal disposition most of the time and how much effort the developers put in.

[Ransom]

So if the gameplay was run of the mill, but was backed up by a spectecular story, you'd play that over the one with little to no story but unbelievably awesome gameplay?

If I had to choose? Yes. Games can be fun and I like having fun, but stories are what I'm really interested in. Interactive fiction is fascinating to me.

Luckily, I don't have to choose, and games like Wipeout can exist right alongside something like Arcanum.

You cannot enjoy a story if you have to fight poor gameplay. Hence gamepay is more important than story. You can enjoy a game with excellent gameplay but poor story, but you cannot usually enjoy a game with excellent story but poor gameplay.

It really depends on the way in which the gameplay's poor. The Silent Hill games, for instance, have universally abysmal gameplay but are well-respected because of their stories; likewise, Planescape: Torment's gameplay is functional at best, sloppy at worst, and the majority of the enjoyment comes from the narrative. The aforementioned Arcanum has some of the worst damn gameplay I've ever experienced, for God's sake. I still adore it.

I agree that there's a point where it's just not worth it, and of course all creators should remember that they are after all making games, but I don't think it's as simple as you suggest. There are degrees. Gameplay should never by neglected to the point that it's painful, but taking into account realities about developers with less-than-infinite resources I think it's perfectly acceptable (if financially inadvisable) for them to prioritise.

I like Perimeter, and that thing has a crappy ass story.

Bite your tongue. Perimeter has a wonderful story. I wish more games were half as charming and convention-defying as that title's setting.

[Titan]

Either no story or a good story. Good gameplay can't make up for a crappy story. But if there's no story, then it's excusable. If a game tries to push a crappy story, it's a crappy game.

[Stormkeeper]

Bite your tongue. Perimeter has a wonderful story. I wish more games were half as charming and convention-defying as that title's setting.

You could make it out? I couldn't. Only things I got were that for some reason, humanity was leaving Earth through some warp system and the Scourge appeared somewhere, and some wanted to move back down some 'Chain' thing.

[Rodo]

Hmmm. Point. Then what if the gameplay was just average, nothing fancy, just tons of been-there-done-that. But the story is fantastic. Would you still go for the one with excellent gameplay but weak story?

play COD4, let me know what you think afterwards.

[Ransom]

You could make it out? I couldn't. Only things I got were that for some reason, humanity was leaving Earth through some warp system and the Scourge appeared somewhere, and some wanted to move back down some 'Chain' thing.

It's a bit convoluted and delivered in a moderately confusing way due to cuts made to the script, but no, I didn't have trouble following it.

It wasn't Earth they left, for instance. I think a lot of the people who complain about Perimeter's story have made the mistake of trying to ground it somewhere in our universe, which simply isn't where the game is set. Add to that the highly abstract nature of the game's principle characters and I can sympathise with your confusion. But it's all there. They outright tell you the explanations for everything you mentioned in your post. You need to be paying attention, though.

It's a shame it did so poorly. Gaming needs more high-concept SF.

[General Battuta]

Any good gameplay tells a story, so it's kind of a false dichotomy.

[Ransom]

I don't think so. It's very true that gameplay and story should be inseparable, but that doesn't relate to how fun the gameplay is nor whether the story's worth telling. Seems to me the question concerns fun versus the cerebral more than it does the role gameplay has in storytelling.

[BloodEagle]

I play games for the fun aspect, so...: Gameplay > Audio > Story > Graphics

Note: those aren't arrows.

So I was reading a Gamespot article [...]

Why would you do something as silly as that? 

Gameplay or story?
 
It depends on the game, TF2 and asteroids are great for gameplay even tetris is more addictive than crack. But Zork and the like excell at storyplaying. Finding a median between the two sometimes works, sometimes it doesn't. It just depends on personal disposition most of the time and how much effort the developers put in.

One of the key reasons for Tetris being so popular is the audio aspect.  Without it, it's still a potentially fun game (see below), but it's seriously lacking something.

Side note: you're either a Tetris person, or a Columns person.  I've never heard anyone say that one isn't far superior to the other.  I'm a Columns person. 

Either no story or a good story. Good gameplay can't make up for a crappy story. But if there's no story, then it's excusable. If a game tries to push a crappy story, it's a crappy game.

See: Final Fantasy Tactics Advance.

Spoiler:

The little girl won't save her friends, because she likes her new hairstyle. 

Any good gameplay tells a story, so it's kind of a false dichotomy.

I don't think so. It's very true that gameplay and story should be inseparable, but that doesn't relate to how fun the gameplay is nor whether the story's worth telling. Seems to me the question concerns fun versus the cerebral more than it does the role gameplay has in storytelling.

This.

Max Payne is a good example of this.  The gameplay is downright pathetic, and yet the story is ingrained within it quite well.  Of course, the narrative slideshow in a noir setting is the main draw, for me.

[General Battuta]

I don't think so. It's very true that gameplay and story should be inseparable, but that doesn't relate to how fun the gameplay is nor whether the story's worth telling. Seems to me the question concerns fun versus the cerebral more than it does the role gameplay has in storytelling.

I think this bespeaks something of a miscommunication about what we mean by 'story'. Asteroids has no story, per se, but the gameplay certainly tells a story: you are surrounded, you are harried, you must move quickly to defeat obstacles. No matter how simple the gameplay task, the player is probably constructing a narrative to go with it: "I'm a hero, I'm so skilled, oh no this is impossible", etcetera and whatnot.

Take...Peggle. No plot whatsoever. But when you play, you're nonetheless spinning out a narrative of sorts - one built out of very small gameplay events (I succeeded! I did better than last time! Uh-oh, I'm not getting as many points as I used to). And that story is part of why the game becomes so addictive; the drive to constantly improve is powerful.

That's what I mean by 'all gameplay tells a story'. Gameplay mechanics must be invested with meaning and value in order to be enjoyable. This is why grinding in MMOs so often becomes objectionable; it feels sterile and unrewarding, a mere mechanical action in pursuit of an abstract goal.

[phatosealpha]

Gamplay.  For me at least, a non-existent story or even a bad one cannot signifigantly pull down an otherwise good game - I'll just ignore it.  By comparison, even an excellent story can only serve it's purpose if the gameplay is at least palatable.  A truly bad story cannot ruin a good game, but a truly great story cannot save a bad game either.


Edit:  There is something worth considering though, like the question of where exactly gameplay ends and story begins.  Take torment, or any number of similar titles where story is progress largely through dialogue trees.  Deciding what you're going to say is part of the gameplay though, so is that story, gameplay, or both?

[Sushi]

I think I'm with Battuta: you can't really separate them.

[General Battuta]

Perhaps 'plot' would be a better term for the traditional narrative elements of a game?