What do you think is more important the gameplay of a videogame, the story, or are they equally impotant? Or do other aspects help balance all attributes of one?

I think most people will agree that gameplay is far more important.

When you think about it, a game can have no story at all and still be fun. Practically every fighting game ever made has little or no story, and no one even cares. Shooters often have virtually no plot. Ditto for puzzle games.

Sure, a lot of games are based heavily around their story, but if they're not playable, then no one will even care. Besides, most video game stories pale in comparison to what you can find in any bookstore or library.

I agree with Prak. I don't need a story to play Tekken, Tetris, Call of Duty or Mario. Although a game with an interesting and original story can attract my attention, the gameplay is what keeps me playing it at the end of the day.

mostly gameplay

tho it depends on the genre

look at a game like Bioshock, wich had like one of the most interesting settings in gaming in a long while, it managed to go overboard on the gameplay and fallin juuuuust a lil bit short in the story department

i would've preffered it went a bit more minimalistic in its approach of all the power ups and stuff and focused more on a convincing story and all around world

i hated it when Ken Levine stated in interviews that story and charakters always come last as that was one of the most interesting things i saw in Bioshock

so yeh, when there's a cinematic perspective behind the game its all about balance
and most devs get that shit so fuckin wrong its a rarity we get to play games that have a decent and more importantly, unique story to tell combined with solid gameplay

dont get me wrong bout Bioshock btw; i've finished it twice and i think it pretty much deserved allmost all the praise it got

That's a tough one for me, because while good gameplay is a most wanted feature, a good story is what actually makes me want to replay the game over and over example: KOTOR.

Interesting example, and that brings up what I hope is an interesting idea.

In RPGs like KOTOR, where there are so many possible choices to make and so many outcomes that those choices can bring about, the level of interactivity with the story makes it possible (and perhaps even very sensible) to consider the story itself part of the gameplay.

I couldn't have explained it better! Also, my sentiments exactly.

OFF-Topic: I think KOTOR II would have exceeded its expectations if the story took on more dramatic twists and turns, such as being able to kill a member of your party because you are Sith and they stand against it or vice-versa (rather than just converting everyone or losing influence). In my opinion the optional twists in KOTOR I left a bigger impact by the end of the game.

Since this is general gaming it's hard to really give a definitive answer to this question, since many genres don't even pretend to have a story (note the many examples Prak listed) or simply don't need one, such as sports games.

However in terms of console RPGs I would say it is roughly 50-50, since you actually have certain pre-concieved notions of expectation of RPGs in terms of their plot and characters (at least I do). In other genres, it's not so important. Solid gameplay is obviously important in all genres, however, since player interaction centres around it and cutting it out would be removing the player from the experience.

Also, Prak:


In RPGs like KOTOR, where there are so many possible choices to make and so many outcomes that those choices can bring about, the level of interactivity with the story makes it possible (and perhaps even very sensible) to consider the story itself part of the gameplay.

Having never played KOTOR I shall not comment on that particular example but the idea itself is something interesting. Would you, for example, consider FFX-2's relatively open-ended plot to be simply an extension of the gameplay or part of the story itself? I don't have a real opinion on this matter, so don't expect a debate, but I would be interested in hearing your views on that example and why, if you do agree that the openendedness of its plot can be considered an extension of its gameplay, you consider that to be the case.

gameplay.

if they happen to slap a good story on a game that's nice. but if i wanted stories i'd read books.

gameplay ftw

Story. If I played through an entire game and find that the ending is shite, I probably won't be buying further games from the series.

I think it depends really. I'm a fan of many different genres and some have little to no story. With those kinds of games, then I believe gameplay is very important. In some other genres, the game is heavily dependent on gameplay AND story.

It's complicated really, but I personally prefer story over gameplay. Games that are nothing but about the gameplay gets repetitive and boring to me while a story will keep me playing it so I can find out what happens next.

Gameplay.

eg, even though I already know the story/ending of Portal, I would still like to buy it.

It's complicated really, but I personally prefer story over gameplay. Games that are nothing but about the gameplay gets repetitive and boring to me while a story will keep me playing it so I can find out what happens next.

It seems to me that you've confused the purpose of games with the purpose of books. Try paying a visit to your local library. You'll get better stories with less investment.

Since this is general gaming it's hard to really give a definitive answer to this question, since many genres don't even pretend to have a story or simply don't need one.

However in terms of console RPGs I would say it is roughly 50-50

x 2

It seems to me that you've confused the purpose of games with the purpose of books. Try paying a visit to your local library. You'll get better stories with less investment.
I read books and stories (written a few myself and am currently writing one that is currently 103 pages). The purpose of a video game is to have fun, right? I have fun with whatever I play, as long as I like it I might add. Books aren't the only things that have a story to them. Perhaps you'd rather read a book than watch a good movie? I don't know. But a video game with a deep storyline is like an animated book to me and I find that fun. The video game has served its purpose.

Prak, there are many ways to be entertained (board games, Music, Movies, TV programs, sports, etc...). Video games can mix many entertainment types and I think that's what makes it all that great.

If a game has a story to make the players care more about the character they control the better it is IMO.

Now, the story telling might not always be on par with Faulkner's, it's still more than decent in many games I play.

I see the many story parts of a game as a reward for my achievement through it. I still enjoy many games that have little to no story, but I tend to prefer story driven games.

The best for me would be to keep a balance between story and gameplay, where you play most of the game, but get a rewarding story part (I must admit that I'm an eye-candy whore :P) after completing a difficult task.

stories do sometimes tend to draw a person near the entertainment they seek, but then again as far as books and games are concerned it could be.....the synopsis; just a quick glimpse at what you'll be doing, and what the game is about.

Depends on what genre the game is really (In my opinion)
Real Time Strategy - Story
Fighting games - Gameplay
First Person Shooter/Third Person - Gameplay
Roleplay - Story/gameplay (They both Equals)
Sport - STORY!!!!!

Real Time Strategy - Story

I lol'd















If that was serious, I'm lolling at you, not with you.

I lol'd















If that was serious, I'm lolling at you, not with you.

Yeah, i am serious. I think RTS should be focused more on story than Gameplay. Look at what Warcraft and Homeworld series have archieved... These games got brilliant storyline, which makes the gameplay even more fun. The cutscenes, the dialog and the plot itself. And yes, you can laugh at me cause i am soooo funny! =D :P

stories in games are fun to me, books, and movies can become so dull. working around a game's genre and gameplay can give the storyteller something to work with

Yeah, i am serious. I think RTS should be focused more on story than Gameplay. Look at what Warcraft and Homeworld series have archieved... These games got brilliant storyline, which makes the gameplay even more fun. The cutscenes, the dialog and the plot itself. And yes, you can laugh at me cause i am soooo funny! =D :P

Much to my shame, I never played Homeworld. However, to say that Warcraft's story is more important than its gameplay is insane at best.

Actually, that's my opinion. But the fact is Warcraft have one of the best story out there. It is the reason why i keep playing the game, even if the gameplay wasn't that new or great. I mean, i love the game, it is fun and all that but i play for the story, it is exciting. Like i said, it is my opinion. :)

i can enjoy a story more from a game after i beat it

A game can have virtually no story or a shitty story and have good gameplay and still be fun to play.

A game can have a great story with characters with a lot of depth and have shitty gameplay and be a pain to play.

So, I guess gameplay wins out. I still like a good story (in games that warrant it -- I dont' really care if my fighting/puzzle games have a story), but it doesn't do much good if you can't uncover the story because the gameplay makes you want to tear your hair out.

That being said, a game that is lacking in certain areas of gameplay can be redeemed with a good story.

Kunta Kinte, you're right there.. Fighting/Puzzle games = Gameplay
But other than that, i say Gameplay wins for the most. But RTS should still be Story, in my opinion. ;)

i see......... so while almost everyone like a good story, gameplay keeps the masses coming back, which brings up another important aspect of gaming

Can i pick both?
Examples:
Tetris <3
KOTOR I & II <3

A game without one of them is nothing. I only play stuff that`s playable and has a good story too.

A game without one of them is nothing. I only play stuff that`s playable and has a good story too.

Then you're a moron. Congratulations on writing off Tetris, practically every Mario game ever made, tons of excellent strategy games, and numerous others as "nothing."

A good story's a nice bonus in a video game, but I only care about it being good enough to the point where it doesn't detract from the overall enjoyment of the game. Namely, as long as it isn't really, really annoyingly bad. Like those trying to hard gangster games that think they've got instant street cred by using the f and b words every couple seconds.

Then you're a moron. Congratulations on writing off Tetris, practically every Mario game ever made, tons of excellent strategy games, and numerous others as "nothing."

You have a point, maybe I was a bit too rigid. I`ll fix my mistake.
There are games like Tetris for quick play that don`t have and don`t even need to have a particular story and there are strategy games which are made so that you could create a story by playing. Although I never played Tetris for longer than 15 minutes. And as for Mario games they all are crap to me. Maybe some of the first one`s were entertaining because I was 5 years old back then.

I reiterate:

You're a moron.

Anyone who calls all Mario games crap has zero credibility as any sort of gamer. You're the worst sort of pathetic kid-friendly-phobic poser and should be purged from existence so those of us who appreciate games for being games can return sanity to the market.

uh-oh you done gone and pissed prak of again!! and for good reasons too mon!
if it wasn't for the plump plumber, i wouldn't be so into gaming, and there would be no smash bros

I would have to actually agree with Prak here, surprisingly. I'm not a fan of Mario at all, but I do admit that Super Mario 64 is a game that I will be playing till the day I die (I have never gotten all the stars yet :() and I would also like to try out Super Mario Galaxy.

As for SSB, I think I'll pass. For me, a game like that will get very old very quickly.

Super Mario Galaxy is awesome, IDX.

My favorite Mario game ties between World and Sunshine.

galaxy's story and gameplay are equally good

I've tried Sunshine, but it just didn't do it for me. I can't really explain why but I just couldn't get into it.

For me, Mario games died after 64. And after Mario Party... 3. 8 is just too much. :-\

If I had my way, I'd have a game that had both. Gameplay AND story. Those are the games that more often than not find themselves in my favorites list. But gameplay holds a bit more weight than story, I think... if a game has a great story but is impossible or otherwise lacking in gameplay, I'll lose interest quick. On the other hand, fun gameplay can make up for a crappy story - Mario, Tetris, and the infamous Dynasty Warriors series (no real story, but hey, you get to kill people by the thousands!)

gameplay like

j mono both me like

I can't stand Dynasty Warriors just because all you do is run around and kill people. Also, I couldn't stand Dragon Quest VIII, not because of story or gameplay (although I thought the gameplay was kinda stale), but it was the music I just couldn't stand.

As for SSB, I think I'll pass. For me, a game like that will get very old very quickly.


prolly cause your supposed to play them with friends?


more poeple = endless replay. ENDLESS!


now go find some friends or ask your parents to make more siblings. :p

The second option seems to be moe time consuming since you'd have to wait for the siblings to reach an appropriate age to play with.