"Games have no Heart..."

[9mak9]

http://www.gamespy.com/articles/952/952719p1.html

I think its a very good point that he makes...personally my number 1 thing to look for in a game is the story (especially since rpg and adventure are my favorite genres). There doesn't seem to be good writing in terms of games or they choose to not develop a good involving story in most games.

This is definitely contingent on a few things, a good amount of strategy games don't really have/need a story. But this is definitely true for a majority of games.

 

[mindcycle]

I've seen some recent games that tell a compelling story. Mass Effect, MGS4, Bioshock to some degree. But they are few and far between. Developers know they are dealing with gamers who have extremely short attention spans. Why? ..because of the direction of television/film, as well as game studios themselves, but it's what they are working with now. So instead of expecting gamers to get into an intriguing story, they just throw in mass amounts of action or other repetitive tasks to make up for the mediocre plot. Most of the time the plot is rehashed garbage too.

The upside is that the technology exists to make games with compelling stories and film like presentation, so I think we'll at least see more attempts at Mass Effect like universes in the future. But again, the trend isn't going to favor those titles since they take longer to make and typically don't satisfy those with short attention spans.

Interesting article though. Thanks for posting it.

 

[Malladine]

As we know, imagination and freedom create "heart" in games, not technology. But $$$ mentalities stifle most of that pretty effectively.

 

[s44]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
The upside is that the technology exists to make games with compelling stories and film like presentation, so I think we'll at least see more attempts at Mass Effect like universes in the future. But again, the trend isn't going to favor those titles since they take longer to make and typically don't satisfy those with short attention spans.

Exactly. Heart and story take money and resources, and don't necessarily make money. (Some few developers -- like Bioware -- have made this their calling card, but the market doesn't seem to be crying out for more.)

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

Any game that tells a story is only serving to keep the medium immature. The embracing of the hollywood mentality totally ignores the much greater potential gaming has. You don't tell a story with a game - you make hundreds of them. I'm sure the hollywood types would love to see gaming stick to their stuff, of course - but the medium isn't going to mature by emulating hollywood.

 

[9mak9]

A game like Planescape:Torment, Beyond Good & Evil, Baldurs Gate, Longest Journey/Dreamfall; are my favorite games because they actual had incredible story to go through. You actually felt the characters and it leaves a more lasting affect after you plat, and you just want a sequel...and then another...

 

[ultimahwhat]

Originally posted by: PhatoseAlpha
Any game that tells a story is only serving to keep the medium immature. The embracing of the hollywood mentality totally ignores the much greater potential gaming has. You don't tell a story with a game - you make hundreds of them. I'm sure the hollywood types would love to see gaming stick to their stuff, of course - but the medium isn't going to mature by emulating hollywood.

I can kind of see what you're saying, but you've got to realize the art of great storytelling predates Hollywood by probably thousands of years. I don't think Serkis is advocating games in the spirit of I Sort of Remember What You Did Ten Summers Ago; that's missing the point.

 

[9mak9]

The Angry Bear #1: The Heart of Gaming

A nice little addition to Andy's comments...I personally like the ending of the story:


"As I pointed out in my Seven Cities of Gold write-up in our Greatest PC Games of the '80s feature, the beauty of that game was how it allowed me -- not a character I was playing, but me -- to become Cortez without even realizing that that's what was happening.

That's the real "heart" that's missing in gaming. It's the one thing that gaming can do that no other artistic medium can. I can truly become a space marine, President of the United States, a wizard, a scorpion, a vampire or (possibly as the medium evolves) a divorced alcoholic dad trying to reconcile with his wife, a bumbling detective trying to solve the theft of a giant diamond, a refugee fleeing from an African militia or a virus attempting to penetrate the wall of a cell.

That's not to say that spectacle, abstraction and escapism should become things of the past. I like big explosions and mindless entertainment as much as the next geek. I simply believe that this medium is capable of much more than that. Just as the world of film has within it space for romantic comedies, nature documentaries, political diatribes, cartoons, educational materials, dramas about cancer, art films about existentialism and, yes, big silly summer blockbusters featuring giant robots punching each other, so too is there room in gaming for things that go beyond endless retreads of "Aliens" and "The Lord of the Rings" to things we can't even imagine yet because they have no parallel. That's the heart of gaming. It's out there and we need to find it."

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

Originally posted by: ultimahwhat

Originally posted by: PhatoseAlpha
Any game that tells a story is only serving to keep the medium immature. The embracing of the hollywood mentality totally ignores the much greater potential gaming has. You don't tell a story with a game - you make hundreds of them. I'm sure the hollywood types would love to see gaming stick to their stuff, of course - but the medium isn't going to mature by emulating hollywood.

I can kind of see what you're saying, but you've got to realize the art of great storytelling predates Hollywood by probably thousands of years. I don't think Serkis is advocating games in the spirit of I Sort of Remember What You Did Ten Summers Ago; that's missing the point.

Oh, I understand that very well. I simply feel that attempting to make video games - or any sort of true interactive medium - attempt to embrace a paradigm for non-interactive mediums - is little more then a form of intellectual laziness.

The very word storyTELLING tells you all you need to know - it's one directional, and using that kind of approach in a medium that is not one directional isn't maturing the medium, it's crippling it.

 

[Newbian]

If you want hearts then go play hearts since most os comes with it these days.

 

[Piuc2020]

I don't know why somehow having "heart" means you need to have a good story.

Games can be emotionally powerful experiences (that's why they are art) and they don't necessarily need to have a good story, take LittleBigPlanet for example, which is hardly a game which can be called "with no heart" but has no (worthy) storytelling to speak of.

Serkis also talks about lasting experiences and games have a much powerful (and lasting) emotional impact than say movies (music can come close).

To be honest, I think Andy Serkis doesn't have the least idea of what he is talking about, I don't think it matters than he loves video games or that he "is in the industry". He needs to think more careful about what he is saying and what it really means to have a heart, especially when alluding to the "games are art" debate.

 

[mooncancook]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
I don't know why somehow having "heart" means you need to have a good story.

good point. Mario Galaxy has an incredibly cheesy plot but I think it's got "heart". Kiddie theme games, most puzzle, sports, racing games don't need much of a story. I guess the author meant story-driven games need to have good story. I think most RPG, adventure, strategy and fps with campaigns are story-driven.