Stories are more important than gameplay

>Stories are more important than gameplay
Explain this mindset.

The only people who say that are teenage STEM fags who are afraid of anything even slightly artistic.

AKA 90% of Sup Forums.

People who can't enjoy life or fun gameplay and need to escape into another world and narrative.

Miyamoto, is that you?

People play games with great stories and think that the story is what made the game good rather than the game, so they apply this flawed mindset to every game

Stems are the ones who actually buy games. Enjoy your gender studies degree.

Actually, STEM people don't value them enough to consider buying them. Enjoy your "engineering" degree.

I won't say story is more important, but I think we can all agree a good story can only improve an already good game.

Wouldn't those kind of people dismiss stories in favor of gameplay? Did you misread OP?

You can't spend the next 15 years reminiscing about the gameplay.

In that game both were good tho.
Got a bit boring at the end but that's it

I did misread OP, because I thought OP wasn't clinically retarded. Thanks for correcting me though

This is your daily reminder that Gone Home, Journey, and The Stanley Parable are all better and more important games than your favorite games, including STALKER and Morrowind.

STALKER and Morrowind are overrated

were those your first go-to "good" games?

does Journey even have a story?

maybe a guy wants an interactive story once in a while?

why can't people deal with there being a variety of shit and some of it might not be what they like or understand?

Sup Forums thinks they are good.
>does Journey even have a story?
Of course it does, it's just told more abstractly.

Sup Forums doesn't think they're good

But you can spend the next 15 years going back to the game at least once every single year of those 15.

Yeah, but I can't relive when I'm taking a walk. When I'm at work. When I'm old and grey. The graphics and gameplay will age and be surpassed, but the story might've just reached the pinnacle.

If you're not taking advantage of the unique aspects of the medium, then you're no better off than having made a TV show, book, or movie.

I used to think story > gameplay, back when I was a stupid underage shitstain. I honestly can't remember or think of why I had that mindset.

>Explain this mindset.
People who don't like games.

Interactive stories are unique to the medium, though. Your decisions dictate the progression and outcome, in some games your failure have irrevocable consequences.

Note that most games bypass this in favor of more linear storytelling but that's not what I'm talking about. Hell, even having numerous endings is unique to video games.

Imagine if you will, that you suck at video games.

Story just adds flavor to a game. Spec Ops: The Line is the only example where gameplay was pretty generic but had highly positive reviews for the story. Earthbound was good because of a cool story, but the gameplay elements and enemies are what made it good

I don't understand why it should matter to you if someone wanted to enjoy an interactive movie. if I'm playing a game that's intense to me like say a rogue-like (something I enjoy) and I want a break and want to play the walking dead by telltale or a wolf among us, what's the problem?

why is it a problem that someone have this instead of a tv show, book, or movie?

>more important

WEW LAD

But seriously, half of SMRPG's appeal is the look and feel of the Mario World that Square crafted.

Though I couldn't tell you if that falls under Graphics or Story. Seems like both.

And Gone Home
And Journey

>RPG had bad gameplay
???

>Interactive stories are unique to the medium
Choose your adventure books
DVD/Blu-Ray menus

Interactive stores are not unique.

No man's sky has no story but it's still shitty

>graphics and gameplay will age
fag

I still can't wrap my head around how Spec Ops can be considered good

Yeah, because choose your adventure books and DVD menus are exactly like Journey/Gone Home.

How old are you?

Video games don't have to be games. Just because a compound phrase has a word in it doesn't mean that word applies. That's a pretty basic concept of language, and a readily apparent one at that.

>the only disciplines that exist are stem and gender studies

That's actually why I posted the Super Mario RPG image; the game gets a lot of praise, but from what I've seen, most fans only like it for the story.

I'm not saying that games shouldn't have stories, but at the same time I don't think a good story will save a game if the gameplay feels like a chore. That's the problem I have with Pokemon Mystery Dungeon.

So would you pay $60 for a movie, or a book?

Most of them, anyway. For every Battletoads there are fifty Kid Icarus that have just been done way better since.

>Video games don't have to be games

>would you pay $60 for a book?
is this a real question

people play video games to play video games
that is why they exist
there are several other mediums to tell your story in that don't need to cost so much and be on a certain console or pc, that you have to deal with to get through rather than enjoying the actual thing.

I don't mean textbooks you fucknut, I mean a story book, fiction, a novel.

There has never been a video game with a good story. Ever. I will restate this point until I am dead. Every game you will "reminisce" about has a story no better than a summer blockbuster.

So, my argument against your point is that there is no game with a story WORTH reminiscing about.

There's STEM and then there's useless shit for retards. It's up to you which one you want for your life.

Seems like the kind of argument made by someone who hasn't played very many games.

Those fags can stick to movies, if the game isn't fun to play I'm not getting it, I.E telltale games.

>You can't spend the next 15 years reminiscing about the gameplay.
You can.
>Doom

I remember when this pasta was originally posted. It's funny now, but at the time, it was baffling to think someone with this line of thinking made it past birth.

Enjoy getting replaced by a robot.

>>Yeah, because choose your adventure books and DVD menus are exactly like Journey/Gone Home.
Journey/Gone Homo don't even have multiple endings.

Seems like the line of thinking of someone with incredibly low standards.

If only. Maybe I could still enjoy something so far down the totem pole of entertainment as a summer blockbuster.

Would you pay 60 bucks for a video game?

Those astronomers sure are making tons of dosh.

Story in a sense of plot with linear structure, varying narrative style and so on? Maybe.
In terms of being a piece of prose that explores a particular theme? Torment does it pretty well and in ways that is only possible in interactive medium.

Name five movies/books which you consider to contain a better story than any video game so that I may laugh at you some more.

They are too slack-jawed to crack open a book or sit through a 2 hour movie so they rely on games to convey messages to them. Too bad most game stories are just really simplistic short stories padded out by gameplay.

This is very, very true.

It can make you feel stuff when playing because of higher involvement, but the stories, especially if they're actually being told to you as you progress the game instead of being subtly put into the game's background and other stuff, are never that great.

No.

Surely you know of several examples so clearly superior to video games that there should be no question as to your argument being valid?

Dude, there are quite a number of CYOA books with D&D-like fighting rules, stats that you carry over to the next book, multiple endings that can change how you start in the next book, items that you can carry over to the next book and shit.

Why the fuck are you shit-talking about age if you're just gonna wave your ignorance around?

Name 50 examples of asking to name 5 examples ever being a good way to progress in a discussion.

Saying everything is bad and then failing to produce even a single example is also very tactful. You've wasted enough of my time, I'll be ignoring you now.

You can't ignore me, I'll just pretend to be someone else.

The Brothers Karamazov
Venus in Furs
The Stranger
The Idiot
Anna Karenina
War and Peace
Ulysses
Orlando
To the Lighthouse

And these are all entry level (except maybe Ulysses). These are all stories that are incredibly nuanced, and something that cannot be replicated in video game form without making it a VN (and, at that point, you might as well read the book since you'd be missing out on key details, such as moments of self reflection that would be taken out because it wouldn't "flow" with the nature of VNs).

Listen, you know damn well if I say anything, even if it was, like, Citizen Kane, I would be ripped to shreds by morons on here for liking x.

But seriously, if you can compare any game to the story in say, Flowers for Algernon or the Outsiders in terms of depth and character development I would be shocked.

Due to the action that a video game needs to stay interesting, you cannot have proper development of a character or proper dialogue.

Stop trying to turn video games INTO movies or books. Let them be their own medium with their own merits. If you want great stories, you can get them via other mediums. What do you have if you want great gameplay? What do you have if you want great interactivity? I'm not saying that a game should NOT have a story. I'm saying it should take the back seat, and a game should stop trying to be something it isn't.

The main difference between these stories and games/movies is that instead of descriptions the games outright show you the scenes (except for IF games like Zork, Trinity etc), cutting out part of the prose and hence crafting the illusion that the storytelling is dumbed down in comparison.

There is the occasional Myst or Yume Nikki, though it's closer to a painting's form of art than to a book's.

It's not an illusion.
That's literally the only reason comics are considered a lesser form of literature.

better resolution of pic?

>the only reason comics are considered a lesser form of literature
Not really. Comics have the reputation of being immature, in part due to being more accessible to younger generations (remember the phrase "I don't know what it said but I liked the pictures") and in part due to the samey cheap pulp superhero stories that popularized the medium.

I guess I was overstating it for emphasis, those reasons are valid as well.

You won't listen to this, but there's more to life than being a machine. Read a book, then read more books, then go outside. Good luck.

Even stating it as a major reason is missing the point. Come on, movies are "high art" nowadays. Hating on Godfather movies or Mulholland Drive gets you labeled a contrarian hipster.