Hmm.. People throw about the term 'genius' with such reckless abandon these days. If writers like Michael Crichton are geniuses, what would you call people like Dostoeyevsky and Albert Camus?Originally posted by alpharogue@Sep. 24 2002, 8:09 pm
Don't get me wrong, Chrichton is a genius, but in the world of video games, stick with the writers at Squaresoft and whomever wrote the "Phantasy Star" series for example. It is all propaganda with him now.
<inhale> Right here. Actually Story (and characters) are the only reasons i play RPG's. Just look at Xenogears...the Pinnacle in gaming (my opinion - DONT FLAME!!!) and the battles were more or less...boring. Choosing 'Fight' is about as exciting as an Episode of Oprah... But, i agree with you on the 'gamers not wanting to think' thing. It's kinda true with everything nowadays, just look at TV and Movies. They're all trivial, menial, and trite, churned out by 'Marketing experts' for the sake of money. Dont cha just love it?Example: Latest Series of "Just Shoot me." What a way to murder a decent Seinfeld-clone with horrible writing (IMO).
And dont bother using the argument "Watch a movie" or 'read a frikkin book.' I know. I do. But there are significant differences between the two. Example - you will never see FF7 in Hollywood, or France, or hell, anywhere. (The wording of that last sentence was above all, poor) EVER. Becuase Film audiences will say "So he's fucked up...MAJOR...eh, just gimme George Clooney."
What then if Clooney plays Cloud? Well, i've always wanted to see him as a badass vegetable... And FF:Movie. It doesn't come close. Becuase Game stories are LONG. Agreed, some not as long as others, but range anywhere between 10-40 hours. Films cant compare unless their Ben Hur or filmed as serials...Matrix is lookin up to be a pretty fine example. So's Books are really the only viable comparison, yet i prefer them for the authors commentary about love, life and the...uh...human condition...what a cliche...Anway.
I got sick of most action games a couple of years ago...killing polygons (or in my case, Sprites) gets old...quick. That's why i can't understand the fascination with FPS's...its just kill, kill, kill or 'frag, frag, frag'...uh...This has a somewhat twisted bearing on my sig...meh.
Personally, i don't give much of a shite about the 'game' element anymore. Sure i love Dynamite Headdy, REZ and Sonic Adventure 2, but if Square made a game as messed up as "Being John Malkovich," gave it some sweet characters and development, made it 60+ hours with an epic storyline and deep, dark, adult themes (and i'm not talking about S&M dammit) then i really wouldn't give a rats if there was gameplay or not. Just gimme' an adult story. <exhale>
Sorry bout this guys (and gals...damn political correctness)
And if i've offended anyone 'print handicapped,' then hopefully I've bought enough time to escape by confusing you with this fine euphemism. ::
Right. The player isn't going to be interested in taking time to reflect, absorb and respond to the content of a game's story. They've got other things to deal with. But nothing is stopping that stage from becoming very elaborate and driving. Why not let Crichton (That might be spelt wrong, sorry) craft a strong platform for the game to take place on, and then let sega deal with the nuts and bolts of it? Final Fantasy 3 was fun because of the stuff that the story let you do. The game wasn't deep, but you got to battle all sorts of beautifully drawn creatures on a flying airship while fighting a madman who splits the world in half because he's bloody mad and it's up to you to stop him. Story can really drive a game. Crichton knows a good story and sega knows a good game, so my hopes are up for this one.Originally posted by antime@Sep. 26 2002, 11:09 am
Why bother? Generally gamers don't seem to be interested in stories or plots other than as a way to set the stage for the game.