Comments on: A Word Is Worth A Thousand Pictures http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/ Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:41:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ian http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-58366 Ian Tue, 17 Jun 2008 14:55:44 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-58366 <i>The whole “Graphics vs Narrative/Gameplay/Whatever” point is plain stupid. Graphics serve the purpose of the game, it’s not a fight, you have to make things live in harmony, not opposing them, or you’re doomed to make shitty games. The Nintendo brainwashing about “graphics are nothing” is working too well these days, what a shame :/</i> The Sony brainwashing about "graphics are everything" is working too well these days. <b>That</b> is the shame. Obviously it's daft to say graphics are nothing. Even the most ardent anti--shinyness-for-the-sake-of people would have to admit that a new game with fuck-ugly graphics would have to be damn good to get past that, but I tire of people using graphics as any kind of argument about the quality of a game or console. I like the Wii. It's flawed, has a limited library, is prone to (BUZZWORD ALERT!) shovelware, and I fully understand why some developers are wary or unwilling when it comes to making games for it. But I've seen people try to base their anti-Wii arguments based on the power of the thing almost alone. These are the same people who convince themselves that having a 60 inch HDTV in their twenty-by-ten living room makes watching their Blu Ray Heroes episodes a lot better. I think though that physics engines are coming to be relied upon too much too. I remember enjoying the first few levels of Dark Messiah of Might and Magic because the physics made for some fun moments and I had a few instances of unique gameplay. Then I realised for all the shinyness and fancy physics the gameplay wasn't at all compelling. As the sort of person who waits until the bitter end before upgrading my PC, content to play new games on bottom-end graphics as long as I can, I would choose a Deus Ex or Jedi Knight over whichever game some developer has cranked out for the latest decaCore GraphicsBeast XT-100G whilst forgetting to make the gameplay more than passable. The whole “Graphics vs Narrative/Gameplay/Whatever” point is plain stupid.

Graphics serve the purpose of the game, it’s not a fight, you have to make things live in harmony, not opposing them, or you’re doomed to make shitty games.

The Nintendo brainwashing about “graphics are nothing” is working too well these days, what a shame :/

The Sony brainwashing about “graphics are everything” is working too well these days. That is the shame.

Obviously it’s daft to say graphics are nothing. Even the most ardent anti–shinyness-for-the-sake-of people would have to admit that a new game with fuck-ugly graphics would have to be damn good to get past that, but I tire of people using graphics as any kind of argument about the quality of a game or console.

I like the Wii. It’s flawed, has a limited library, is prone to (BUZZWORD ALERT!) shovelware, and I fully understand why some developers are wary or unwilling when it comes to making games for it. But I’ve seen people try to base their anti-Wii arguments based on the power of the thing almost alone. These are the same people who convince themselves that having a 60 inch HDTV in their twenty-by-ten living room makes watching their Blu Ray Heroes episodes a lot better.

I think though that physics engines are coming to be relied upon too much too. I remember enjoying the first few levels of Dark Messiah of Might and Magic because the physics made for some fun moments and I had a few instances of unique gameplay. Then I realised for all the shinyness and fancy physics the gameplay wasn’t at all compelling.

As the sort of person who waits until the bitter end before upgrading my PC, content to play new games on bottom-end graphics as long as I can, I would choose a Deus Ex or Jedi Knight over whichever game some developer has cranked out for the latest decaCore GraphicsBeast XT-100G whilst forgetting to make the gameplay more than passable.

report

]]> By: Nym http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-24294 Nym Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:04:06 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-24294 There's one thing that no one seems to equate as of yet which is: Take my example, I loooooved Grim Fandango (or Full Throttle, Neverhood, Broken Sword, etc) back in the days, but I clearly remember that my first impression when I started playing the game was "Wow! Beautiful graphics!". What I'm trying to say is, all these games we're praising now for having great story telling above graphics, are we forgetting that, back then, they represented the best graphics we could imagine for a game? The only difference is that technology evolves and thank god, games evolve with it! Still, I too feel that games have been losing narrative quality, it's so hard to find a game with a story that keeps you on the edge and makes you feel like you're the character that I end up playing a game per month, if even... And I've always been a game fanatic! I'm currently waiting for MGS4 to finish the saga that I've been following since MGS1 on the PSX. Would I want MGS4 in PSX graphics? Hell no! :) I think that great gameplay + great story + great graphics are what really makes a game brilliant. Still, I understand your point, if I could choose to have a good looking game with bad story or the opposite? I'd prefer story over graphics any day. There’s one thing that no one seems to equate as of yet which is:

Take my example, I loooooved Grim Fandango (or Full Throttle, Neverhood, Broken Sword, etc) back in the days, but I clearly remember that my first impression when I started playing the game was “Wow! Beautiful graphics!”.

What I’m trying to say is, all these games we’re praising now for having great story telling above graphics, are we forgetting that, back then, they represented the best graphics we could imagine for a game? The only difference is that technology evolves and thank god, games evolve with it!

Still, I too feel that games have been losing narrative quality, it’s so hard to find a game with a story that keeps you on the edge and makes you feel like you’re the character that I end up playing a game per month, if even… And I’ve always been a game fanatic!

I’m currently waiting for MGS4 to finish the saga that I’ve been following since MGS1 on the PSX. Would I want MGS4 in PSX graphics? Hell no! :)

I think that great gameplay + great story + great graphics are what really makes a game brilliant. Still, I understand your point, if I could choose to have a good looking game with bad story or the opposite? I’d prefer story over graphics any day.

report

]]> By: Nemo http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-24159 Nemo Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:02:26 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-24159 Just a quick comment. In term of game enjoyability, I think graphics and story don't matter as much as gameplay, as in how smooth your interactions with the game's world are. Tetris doesn't need good graphics nor a story to be goddamn addictive. Simplistic graphics that don't get in the way of the gameplay (= the flow of information between your brain and the software, transmitted through controller and screen) are not a problem. Mario Bros 1 is still a great platformer. The problem with action games that didn't age well usually doesn't lie in the graphics themselves, but the sluggish gameplay that sometimes goes with old hardware (and sloppy programming). This is less of a problem with story-driven games because usually they don't rely as much on precise real-time interactions. Slow RPGs can still be frustrating, but the depth of gameplay (complexity of available interactions) usually makes up for the sluggishness. Just my two cents. Of course nice graphics and narratives are nice to have on top. But when they get in the way of gameplay (e.g. in the form of frequent, long, non-interactive CG sequences that play like a movie), people may start missing the good-old days of text-based adventure games, MUDs and RPGs... Just a quick comment. In term of game enjoyability, I think graphics and story don’t matter as much as gameplay, as in how smooth your interactions with the game’s world are. Tetris doesn’t need good graphics nor a story to be goddamn addictive. Simplistic graphics that don’t get in the way of the gameplay (= the flow of information between your brain and the software, transmitted through controller and screen) are not a problem. Mario Bros 1 is still a great platformer. The problem with action games that didn’t age well usually doesn’t lie in the graphics themselves, but the sluggish gameplay that sometimes goes with old hardware (and sloppy programming). This is less of a problem with story-driven games because usually they don’t rely as much on precise real-time interactions. Slow RPGs can still be frustrating, but the depth of gameplay (complexity of available interactions) usually makes up for the sluggishness.
Just my two cents.
Of course nice graphics and narratives are nice to have on top. But when they get in the way of gameplay (e.g. in the form of frequent, long, non-interactive CG sequences that play like a movie), people may start missing the good-old days of text-based adventure games, MUDs and RPGs…

report

]]> By: Alt http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-24057 Alt Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:43:14 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-24057 I definitely agree with many of the comments about FPS and other multiplayer games in that though they may lack in the "story" department, they are rich in player created narratives. The games you remember are the ones you have some story about. (ex: remember that time I did this one thing in that one game and it was so cool you had to be there.) And just to bring up a minor point, game play doesn't even have to factor in to the equation that much. If you've played the dot-hack games (original series), the game gets pretty repetitive and isn't all that fun to play. But the story is so rich that you want to keep playing despite having to go through the 100th dungeon that looks exactly the same as the other 99, has the same enemies and a slightly different layout. I definitely agree with many of the comments about FPS and other multiplayer games in that though they may lack in the “story” department, they are rich in player created narratives. The games you remember are the ones you have some story about. (ex: remember that time I did this one thing in that one game and it was so cool you had to be there.) And just to bring up a minor point, game play doesn’t even have to factor in to the equation that much. If you’ve played the dot-hack games (original series), the game gets pretty repetitive and isn’t all that fun to play. But the story is so rich that you want to keep playing despite having to go through the 100th dungeon that looks exactly the same as the other 99, has the same enemies and a slightly different layout.

report

]]> By: john_s http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-24052 john_s Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:14:05 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-24052 The trouble with graphics.. it's what sells. Screenshots, magazines and trailers. What the game really feels like when playing, that's a whole other story, (one that you won't hear too much about before _after_ you've blown your cash to buy it). Yet another reason piracy rules... The trouble with graphics.. it’s what sells. Screenshots, magazines and trailers.

What the game really feels like when playing, that’s a whole other story, (one that you won’t hear too much about before _after_ you’ve blown your cash to buy it). Yet another reason piracy rules…

report

]]> By: Tom http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-24048 Tom Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:04:42 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-24048 The desire to "tell a story" has been responsible for some of the most trying moments in my recent gaming lifetime. Excruciatingly-written dialogue scenes you can't bypass. Characters who are sluggish utilitarians to control, then leap into marvelous acrobatic feats of derring-do in the cutscenes. Horrible characters, cardboard cutouts that Golan-Globus would be ashamed to put in a starring role, desperately strutting to the beat of some nerd fantasy of what "cool" looks like. Unimaginative re-enactment after workmanlike reconstruction of the Cliff's Notes for Joseph Campbell. Video games, in their efforts to Have Stories, manage to singlehandedly prove the validity of every criticism leveled at Christopher Vogler's "Writer's Journey" manifesto. (If you liked Booker, I heartily recommend this book also: besides handily summarising said criticisms in the intro, it's a much more adventurous exploration of narrative trope than many give it credit for). In the narratology versus ludology divide, I was a card-carrying narratologist for years. I mean, vocationally, how can I not be? I'm a scriptwriter, film reviewer and editor. It's only natural. So if you say games should stop having such a hardon for graphics and think about story, I'm with you to a point. But what I realised a while back is that I look to games primarily for their play - because I can get narrative elsewhere, better than games have ever done for me. (Bioshock's lucky it was fun to play, because honestly, Randian pastiche and sloppy religion/drug metaphors? Yeah, or I could just read a sci-fi paperback from the 80s, it'd have better cover-art). So your "shooter test" fails for me - if I'm playing something from fifteen years ago (which I oft am), I'd much rather it be something with a strong sense of character but whose play mechanic is solid or imaginative. "Quality of game engine" is an even less quantifiable element than "quality of story", but surely it's an element even more lacking in today's MOR games, as so many developers just slap a GTA/HL2 play mechanic onto a generic setting and let the graphics-hype do the rest. Different works have different cores. One book's highlight may be its story, another its voice. We don't fault Fargo for its lack of fuckoff big explosions, and neither do we fault Batman for its lack of Stoppardian witty banter. Just so, I agree with you that emphasis on graphical prowess is and always has been ridiculous (and I think we used to be better at remembering this: even the really ridiculous 15-year-old mags like CVG had "graphics don't matter" as something of a mantra), and I admire the simplicity with which you make the case for that adage's continued relevance. But where we part company is that I'd like to see more emphasis on identifying what it is that any one game does well - be it epic story, quirky characters, OR unique play mechanic or unprecedented openness - and strive for the Platonic ideal of what a game with that particular core might become. The desire to “tell a story” has been responsible for some of the most trying moments in my recent gaming lifetime.

Excruciatingly-written dialogue scenes you can’t bypass. Characters who are sluggish utilitarians to control, then leap into marvelous acrobatic feats of derring-do in the cutscenes. Horrible characters, cardboard cutouts that Golan-Globus would be ashamed to put in a starring role, desperately strutting to the beat of some nerd fantasy of what “cool” looks like. Unimaginative re-enactment after workmanlike reconstruction of the Cliff’s Notes for Joseph Campbell.

Video games, in their efforts to Have Stories, manage to singlehandedly prove the validity of every criticism leveled at Christopher Vogler’s “Writer’s Journey” manifesto. (If you liked Booker, I heartily recommend this book also: besides handily summarising said criticisms in the intro, it’s a much more adventurous exploration of narrative trope than many give it credit for).

In the narratology versus ludology divide, I was a card-carrying narratologist for years. I mean, vocationally, how can I not be? I’m a scriptwriter, film reviewer and editor. It’s only natural. So if you say games should stop having such a hardon for graphics and think about story, I’m with you to a point.

But what I realised a while back is that I look to games primarily for their play – because I can get narrative elsewhere, better than games have ever done for me. (Bioshock’s lucky it was fun to play, because honestly, Randian pastiche and sloppy religion/drug metaphors? Yeah, or I could just read a sci-fi paperback from the 80s, it’d have better cover-art).

So your “shooter test” fails for me – if I’m playing something from fifteen years ago (which I oft am), I’d much rather it be something with a strong sense of character but whose play mechanic is solid or imaginative. “Quality of game engine” is an even less quantifiable element than “quality of story”, but surely it’s an element even more lacking in today’s MOR games, as so many developers just slap a GTA/HL2 play mechanic onto a generic setting and let the graphics-hype do the rest.

Different works have different cores. One book’s highlight may be its story, another its voice. We don’t fault Fargo for its lack of fuckoff big explosions, and neither do we fault Batman for its lack of Stoppardian witty banter.

Just so, I agree with you that emphasis on graphical prowess is and always has been ridiculous (and I think we used to be better at remembering this: even the really ridiculous 15-year-old mags like CVG had “graphics don’t matter” as something of a mantra), and I admire the simplicity with which you make the case for that adage’s continued relevance. But where we part company is that I’d like to see more emphasis on identifying what it is that any one game does well – be it epic story, quirky characters, OR unique play mechanic or unprecedented openness – and strive for the Platonic ideal of what a game with that particular core might become.

report

]]> By: Alec Meer http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-24030 Alec Meer Tue, 12 Feb 2008 23:20:51 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-24030 chubbstar: it's just underneath the post title. Link called "share this story." chubbstar: it’s just underneath the post title. Link called “share this story.”

report

]]> By: chubbstar http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-24025 chubbstar Tue, 12 Feb 2008 23:15:28 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-24025 wheres the freaking digg button on this site? wheres the freaking digg button on this site?

report

]]> By: Neej http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-24009 Neej Tue, 12 Feb 2008 22:18:07 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-24009 As a fan of narrative-driven games, I enjoyed the read. I think that one element that cannot be overlooked, as many have already stated, is gameplay. Whether a game is solid on graphics or narrative or both, if the gameplay is flawed, I’m not going to want to play it for more than 5 minutes (whether it was released this morning or 20 years ago). Tetris, Zelda, and Mario will be around for eons simply because Nintendo figured out early on that gameplay trumps everything else. That being said, I hear what you’re saying about narrative vs graphics in terms of longevity. When it comes to old classics with poor narrative, I really wouldn’t bother playing something like Wolfenstein or Duke Nukem for any reason apart from nostalgia. There are plenty of newer games that have similar gameplay with far better visual/audio presentation… if I’m going to invest hours playing a fun FPS, I’d rather do it with the most immersive experience available. With good narrative, however, it’s a different situation. Monkey Island and the almighty Star Control 2 are games I go back to from time to time because I do feel like I’m going back to reread an old cherished book. Still, without gameplay (an element LucasArts and Star Con 2 also capture in perfection), it would be less-than-entertaining to go through the whole process again. Case in point… I was a huge fan of the Sierra adventures back in the day, but I tried playing the old King’s Quest and Space Quest games again and got tired of dying often or getting to the end without picking up some crucial item early on….or frantically typing a command before you get eaten by a dragon in the pre point-and-click ones. While not a total waste of time, it ended up being not nearly as fun as I remember. (The Sierra games that got gameplay right, like Quest for Glory, are a different story though.) Gameplay plus either nostalgia or narrative is essential for going back to the classics. As a fan of narrative-driven games, I enjoyed the read. I think that one element that cannot be overlooked, as many have already stated, is gameplay. Whether a game is solid on graphics or narrative or both, if the gameplay is flawed, I’m not going to want to play it for more than 5 minutes (whether it was released this morning or 20 years ago). Tetris, Zelda, and Mario will be around for eons simply because Nintendo figured out early on that gameplay trumps everything else.

That being said, I hear what you’re saying about narrative vs graphics in terms of longevity. When it comes to old classics with poor narrative, I really wouldn’t bother playing something like Wolfenstein or Duke Nukem for any reason apart from nostalgia. There are plenty of newer games that have similar gameplay with far better visual/audio presentation… if I’m going to invest hours playing a fun FPS, I’d rather do it with the most immersive experience available.

With good narrative, however, it’s a different situation. Monkey Island and the almighty Star Control 2 are games I go back to from time to time because I do feel like I’m going back to reread an old cherished book. Still, without gameplay (an element LucasArts and Star Con 2 also capture in perfection), it would be less-than-entertaining to go through the whole process again. Case in point… I was a huge fan of the Sierra adventures back in the day, but I tried playing the old King’s Quest and Space Quest games again and got tired of dying often or getting to the end without picking up some crucial item early on….or frantically typing a command before you get eaten by a dragon in the pre point-and-click ones. While not a total waste of time, it ended up being not nearly as fun as I remember. (The Sierra games that got gameplay right, like Quest for Glory, are a different story though.) Gameplay plus either nostalgia or narrative is essential for going back to the classics.

report

]]> By: RTM http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-23984 RTM Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:20:52 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-23984 While I agree in part with your premise, your argument needs a lot of work. Super Mario Bros: bad graphics, no story, still a blast to play Bionic Commando: bad graphics, only the most vestigial of stories, still a blast to play Legend of Zelda: no story to speak of, GREAT to play Mega Man: same story, no graphics, no story, great game Metal Slug: beautiful graphics, no story, dynamite fun While I agree in part with your premise, your argument needs a lot of work.

Super Mario Bros: bad graphics, no story, still a blast to play

Bionic Commando: bad graphics, only the most vestigial of stories, still a blast to play

Legend of Zelda: no story to speak of, GREAT to play

Mega Man: same story, no graphics, no story, great game

Metal Slug: beautiful graphics, no story, dynamite fun

report

]]> By: Rock, Paper, Shotgun: Still Hoping For That Post-Apocalyptic Robot Versus Monkey Immersive Sim » Blog Archive » RPS Omnibus: Feb 3rd-8th http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-23213 Rock, Paper, Shotgun: Still Hoping For That Post-Apocalyptic Robot Versus Monkey Immersive Sim » Blog Archive » RPS Omnibus: Feb 3rd-8th Sat, 09 Feb 2008 14:56:50 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-23213 [...] A Word Is Worth A Thousand Pictures - Is narrative more important than graphics? In comments, discussion of what ‘narrative’ really means in a gaming sense - is a player’s own mental attribution of personal purpose and accomplishment to his in-game deeds more affective than even the best-written dialogue and cut-scenes? [...] [...] A Word Is Worth A Thousand Pictures – Is narrative more important than graphics? In comments, discussion of what ‘narrative’ really means in a gaming sense – is a player’s own mental attribution of personal purpose and accomplishment to his in-game deeds more affective than even the best-written dialogue and cut-scenes? [...]

report

]]> By: Dracko http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/04/a-word-is-worth-a-thousand-pictures/#comment-22374 Dracko Wed, 06 Feb 2008 11:54:52 +0000 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1043#comment-22374 I wouldn't mind ultrarealism if it serves the game. I know you're dealing with actual effects of murder in your post, but <i>Operation Flashpoint</i> was one of the most absorbing gaming experiences I ever had growing up and that was down to its uncompromising realism and sheer scope, not to mention its relentless portrayal of infantry combat (Wide, utterly credible country side maps and "one/two shots, you're dead" gameplay, and to address your concerns, the blood and gore effects were somewhat downplayed, but in a good fashion, one I wouldn't call tasteful, because that wouldn't be doing justice to actual warfare, but certainly jarring). I mean, people play simulations for a reason. It's a break from reality in effect, but also allows them some insight into activities they might not be able to partake in normally. Which is the essence of gaming, really. And I too am intrigued by <i>The Path</i>, but I was sold the moment I noticed Jarboe working on the score. I wouldn’t mind ultrarealism if it serves the game. I know you’re dealing with actual effects of murder in your post, but Operation Flashpoint was one of the most absorbing gaming experiences I ever had growing up and that was down to its uncompromising realism and sheer scope, not to mention its relentless portrayal of infantry combat (Wide, utterly credible country side maps and “one/two shots, you’re dead” gameplay, and to address your concerns, the blood and gore effects were somewhat downplayed, but in a good fashion, one I wouldn’t call tasteful, because that wouldn’t be doing justice to actual warfare, but certainly jarring).

I mean, people play simulations for a reason. It’s a break from reality in effect, but also allows them some insight into activities they might not be able to partake in normally. Which is the essence of gaming, really.

And I too am intrigued by The Path, but I was sold the moment I noticed Jarboe working on the score.

report

]]>