Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
WHAT MAKES A GAME'S STORY MEMORABLE TO YOU?
Posts
Paxni
14
Paxni
View playlists
CloseAs the title suggests, what aspects of a game's plot make it particularly interesting or memorable to you? Is it the characters? Does it need massive plot twists? Anything else?
For example, in a game I'm currently designing, it takes a turn for the entirely opposite direction about halfway through. To you, is this a beneficial aspect, or would it harm a plot?
This is not a request, but I will use anything anyone says in here regarding story design fundamentals to help craft my game, and I encourage anyone to do the same. :)
For example, in a game I'm currently designing, it takes a turn for the entirely opposite direction about halfway through. To you, is this a beneficial aspect, or would it harm a plot?
This is not a request, but I will use anything anyone says in here regarding story design fundamentals to help craft my game, and I encourage anyone to do the same. :)
That's a good question, what makes any story memorable : at first thought, I will say the character(s) of course, and the veracity of his speech, behavior, actions; as for the overall story, it has to be always beleivable, there's probably a million more things to say but I would say this is really the basic necessity for any story to be grabbing. Memorable, I would say depends on the depth of this veracity.
Large
332
Good question. However, I don't think, as Chana says, that the story has to be believable to be successful. Take, for instance, LOST; now, I know it wasn't a game, but it was certainly a nicely told story (Not finished in a good way). It wasn't so much as the credibility of the plot, because there were a lot of bizarre elements. I think it was rather the depth of those occurrences. The writers made you believe that there was more to a certain plot point that what was shown, even though they had very likely pulled it out of their ass.
Battlestar Galactica does this with a different approach. It is telling a story of a bunch of rag tag survivors, and their exodus. There is nothing new under this sun, and it is basically the story of the Jewish people leaving Egypt. What made it a great story, was a simple phrase (that believe it or not, came from the animated version of Diseney's "Peter Pan"): "This has happened before, this will all happen again". That sentence gave the plot some cosmic grandeur, a sense of depth, of mysticism, or destiny, of eternal loop. It flirts with a lot of great concepts. Makes up for a nice storytelling.
Of course, you have squat if the plot is thought out and your characters fail to appeal, are uni-dimensional. Interesting character development is far better appreciated in my book that the million plot twists in "24". Or any book by "Dan Brown". Or "Halo".
Battlestar Galactica does this with a different approach. It is telling a story of a bunch of rag tag survivors, and their exodus. There is nothing new under this sun, and it is basically the story of the Jewish people leaving Egypt. What made it a great story, was a simple phrase (that believe it or not, came from the animated version of Diseney's "Peter Pan"): "This has happened before, this will all happen again". That sentence gave the plot some cosmic grandeur, a sense of depth, of mysticism, or destiny, of eternal loop. It flirts with a lot of great concepts. Makes up for a nice storytelling.
Of course, you have squat if the plot is thought out and your characters fail to appeal, are uni-dimensional. Interesting character development is far better appreciated in my book that the million plot twists in "24". Or any book by "Dan Brown". Or "Halo".
Cozzer
0
I guess it's very subjective...
For me, it's likeable and believable characters and getting the climaxes right.
Timing is important too: if you build up tension too much, I'll get tired before the climax; if you don't build it, the climax won't be powerful enough.
For me, it's likeable and believable characters and getting the climaxes right.
Timing is important too: if you build up tension too much, I'll get tired before the climax; if you don't build it, the climax won't be powerful enough.
quillandpaper
221
I would have to say the characters play the biggest part for me. If I don't care for the characters, then I won't care about what they do or what's being done to them. Another part would have to be the story itself. I know that doesn't make much sense outside of my head, but even good characters can't save a flimsy plot. It has to make sense and things can't happen simply because the plot says so. There has to be a rhyme and a reason to motivations and why things are going on. So no, taking a game doing a complete 180 in the middle wouldn't be terrible if there was a reason that made logical sense for it happening.
author=Cozzer
I guess it's very subjective...
For me, it's likeable and believable characters and getting the climaxes right
Brilliant! I totaly agree with this.
One thing that is very important for me in enjoying the stories is having a worthy main villain (or villains).
If the villain is too one-dimensional, incompetent, or if things always go the main hero's way, I tend to roll my eyes.
Sometimes making the villains just a little bit "good" is even cooler for me (a la Darth Vader when he finally snaps at the emperor.)
A good antagonist is half of the story's success! (e.g.: the joker, loki in thor/avengers, magneto, etc...)
Large
332
Yes, if there is a logical reason, I'd say, go ahead and do it.
Golden Sun did it, for example. In the first game, your party is trying to prevent another group from reignite the Elemental Lighthouses, under a supreme being order. On the second game, you take control of that other group and light up the Lighthouses, only to get the original group join your efforts mid-game. It worked for them (I consider the first 2 games one of the best RPGs I've ever played).
Golden Sun did it, for example. In the first game, your party is trying to prevent another group from reignite the Elemental Lighthouses, under a supreme being order. On the second game, you take control of that other group and light up the Lighthouses, only to get the original group join your efforts mid-game. It worked for them (I consider the first 2 games one of the best RPGs I've ever played).
Mateui
1175
author=Paxni
As the title suggests, what aspects of a game's plot make it particularly interesting or memorable to you? Is it the characters? Does it need massive plot twists? Anything else?
For example, in a game I'm currently designing, it takes a turn for the entirely opposite direction about halfway through. To you, is this a beneficial aspect, or would it harm a plot?
This is not a request, but I will use anything anyone says in here regarding story design fundamentals to help craft my game, and I encourage anyone to do the same. :)
I'm a huge fan of plot twists, provided that they are foreshadowed. If they come out of the blue randomly with no prior warnings or indications it feels like a very cheap story telling tactic.
A memorable story to me is one that makes you stop and think afterwards - whether that is by way of having been taught some moral lesson or reflecting upon the events that transpired.
Dyhalto
7536
Plot twists, character development, backstories, whatever; they're just tools in the toolbox.
What the player is going to remember is the emotions invoked during the game. When someone cites "good story", it's a euphemism for "I cried at the touching scenes ;-;". Rather than trying to ask fellow RMers what tools are most popular or best for the job, your goal should be to make the player laugh, cry, cheer, and get mad. This will be done differently for every single project, using a different set of tools, and using those tools very competently.
My advice is to do what you do and keep doing it. There is no substitute for experience, especially in something as abstract as storytelling.
This is one of the reasons I don't post often in design theory topics. Art comes from the soul. It's impossible to articulate what's right and what's not.
What the player is going to remember is the emotions invoked during the game. When someone cites "good story", it's a euphemism for "I cried at the touching scenes ;-;". Rather than trying to ask fellow RMers what tools are most popular or best for the job, your goal should be to make the player laugh, cry, cheer, and get mad. This will be done differently for every single project, using a different set of tools, and using those tools very competently.
My advice is to do what you do and keep doing it. There is no substitute for experience, especially in something as abstract as storytelling.
This is one of the reasons I don't post often in design theory topics. Art comes from the soul. It's impossible to articulate what's right and what's not.
I think the plot by itself does not need to be believable.
However, the characters do need to react believably to their environments. At least in noncomedy situations.
Yeah this.
However, the characters do need to react believably to their environments. At least in noncomedy situations.
author=rabitZ
A good antagonist is half of the story's success! (e.g.: the joker, loki in thor/avengers, magneto, etc...)
Yeah this.
emmych
817
Good characters.
...yup, in thinking on it, that's all I really need. XD Once again, I will look at Arc Rise Fantasia's clusterfuck of a story. It had stupid plot twists, predictable happenings, all that good stuff -- but the cast was really awesome! They ended up being super endearing and memorable in the end, even though the story itself was just stupid. XD
I see the best comedy as being created by conflicting personalities. You know the classic Funny Man/Straight Man model, right? YEAH, LIKE THAT.
...yup, in thinking on it, that's all I really need. XD Once again, I will look at Arc Rise Fantasia's clusterfuck of a story. It had stupid plot twists, predictable happenings, all that good stuff -- but the cast was really awesome! They ended up being super endearing and memorable in the end, even though the story itself was just stupid. XD
However, the characters do need to react believably to their environments. At least in noncomedy situations.Ahhh, actually, characters behaving believably in a comedic situation is what makes things funny! Randomly having folks go super out of character is more detrimental than anything, I think.
I see the best comedy as being created by conflicting personalities. You know the classic Funny Man/Straight Man model, right? YEAH, LIKE THAT.
author=Paxni
As the title suggests, what aspects of a game's plot make it particularly interesting or memorable to you? Is it the characters? Does it need massive plot twists? Anything else?
Memorable and lovable characters hands down. The characters are the storytellers and if they are awesome then I'll very likely end up loving the story no matter how simple, predictable, and cliche a plot it is.
author=DyhaltoDefinitely!
What the player is going to remember is the emotions invoked during the game.
Characters probably. And if the main character's in love, how they handle it.
author=Dyhalto
Plot twists, character development, backstories, whatever; they're just tools in the toolbox.
What the player is going to remember is the emotions invoked during the game. When someone cites "good story", it's a euphemism for "I cried at the touching scenes ;-;". Rather than trying to ask fellow RMers what tools are most popular or best for the job, your goal should be to make the player laugh, cry, cheer, and get mad. This will be done differently for every single project, using a different set of tools, and using those tools very competently.
My advice is to do what you do and keep doing it. There is no substitute for experience, especially in something as abstract as storytelling.
This is one of the reasons I don't post often in design theory topics. Art comes from the soul. It's impossible to articulate what's right and what's not.
Seconding the emotion aspect. When you literally cry at the death of a character in any game or cheer the hell up when the hero makes it out alive on his own from a collapsing castle/underworld/planet/etc. at the very last second, you know something right was done here. A story that emphasizes in heavy emotions only makes the game more memorable in its own right.
Emotion matters more than how original or complex your story is. Basically, you have to feel the same way as the characters in the story to actually enjoy it; because it shows you have something in common with the game's cast, and you want to keep playing it further as a way of expressing feelings you normally wouldn't do elsewhere. The musical aspect only enhances it, if it fits.
Shinan
4314
First I thought about memorable stories, trying to find something that connected the lot of them. Then I decided to narrow it down to memorable game stories and it became a whole lot simpler.
And also more difficult.
There's two things that make a game story memorable to me.
1) Humour
Comedy games are difficult to pull off but some of the best story moments I've encountered in games are usually comedic. When the comedy works. There are certain adventure games that come to mind (Monkey Island, Discworld, Day of the Tentacle), there is maybe one or two RPGs that come to mind and then it's mostly in characters (Morte from Planescape Torment) and there's probably a handful of other games (Magicka, Portal) as well. (I have to admit I haven't played a lot of the great comedy games)
2) Interactivity
This is the difficult one. When I look back on memorable moments and stories in games I always come back to the things I did. So really great characters and an on-rails story doesn't do it that much for me, instead the stories I remember are the sandbox ones where I manage to overcome an obstacle that the game created for me that was more or less unique to my experience. The time Scotland conquered England, the time I relocated and struck back from a secret base in order to win the day. The time I drew the same taxi for two hours through every nook and cranny of the city. The time I was poisoned and almost dead but escaped the bandit camp and dragged myself on crippled limbs to the closest friendly town to heal. Or the cavern I fell into while mining and had to find my way out amongst deadly zombies and skeletons.
Those stories are much more easily remembered than the frankly badly written linear stories that everyone experiences in a game. This is in all honesty the strength of games. But people who want a game to tell their story (and not the player's) will often be at a disadvantage. Sure explosions and twists can be all over the place, but really. That's not the experience players are looking for most of the time.
And also more difficult.
There's two things that make a game story memorable to me.
1) Humour
Comedy games are difficult to pull off but some of the best story moments I've encountered in games are usually comedic. When the comedy works. There are certain adventure games that come to mind (Monkey Island, Discworld, Day of the Tentacle), there is maybe one or two RPGs that come to mind and then it's mostly in characters (Morte from Planescape Torment) and there's probably a handful of other games (Magicka, Portal) as well. (I have to admit I haven't played a lot of the great comedy games)
2) Interactivity
This is the difficult one. When I look back on memorable moments and stories in games I always come back to the things I did. So really great characters and an on-rails story doesn't do it that much for me, instead the stories I remember are the sandbox ones where I manage to overcome an obstacle that the game created for me that was more or less unique to my experience. The time Scotland conquered England, the time I relocated and struck back from a secret base in order to win the day. The time I drew the same taxi for two hours through every nook and cranny of the city. The time I was poisoned and almost dead but escaped the bandit camp and dragged myself on crippled limbs to the closest friendly town to heal. Or the cavern I fell into while mining and had to find my way out amongst deadly zombies and skeletons.
Those stories are much more easily remembered than the frankly badly written linear stories that everyone experiences in a game. This is in all honesty the strength of games. But people who want a game to tell their story (and not the player's) will often be at a disadvantage. Sure explosions and twists can be all over the place, but really. That's not the experience players are looking for most of the time.
Crystalgate
694
I can't think of any game who's whole story was memorable, but I can think of memorable moments. I'll assume we're talking about memorable for the right reason as well.
A great plot twist is memorable. Unfortunately, less than 5% of all twists I see are what I would call great. As a rule, a great plot twist is one that I don't see coming, but on a subsequent playtrough I can see a lot of foreshadowing and realize that the twist is actually a logical conclusion of what the game shown me so far.
An emotional or climactic moment would work. Just like with plot twist, most "moments" aren't what they are supposed to be. As a rule, I need to be in sync with the game for it to work. What it means is that I need to like or hate the involved characters as much as the writer expects me to, I must consider a situation as serious as the writer says it is and so on.
A well written character is more likely to be remembered for the right reason. I'm not going to go into what makes a character well written, but having a tragic past or complicated back-story does not do much for me. It's more a question of getting the character right than making her/him as complex as possible.
Unfortunately, unless you're a good writer, you will not pull it off. No guideline will help a mediocre writer to make a memorable story.
A great plot twist is memorable. Unfortunately, less than 5% of all twists I see are what I would call great. As a rule, a great plot twist is one that I don't see coming, but on a subsequent playtrough I can see a lot of foreshadowing and realize that the twist is actually a logical conclusion of what the game shown me so far.
An emotional or climactic moment would work. Just like with plot twist, most "moments" aren't what they are supposed to be. As a rule, I need to be in sync with the game for it to work. What it means is that I need to like or hate the involved characters as much as the writer expects me to, I must consider a situation as serious as the writer says it is and so on.
A well written character is more likely to be remembered for the right reason. I'm not going to go into what makes a character well written, but having a tragic past or complicated back-story does not do much for me. It's more a question of getting the character right than making her/him as complex as possible.
Unfortunately, unless you're a good writer, you will not pull it off. No guideline will help a mediocre writer to make a memorable story.
I have to return to it over and over again. This sounds obvious but it not only applies to good games but to bad games as well.
What made me return to Master of Monsters for the PSX despite the horrible loading times?
Multiple characters that includes introductions for each characters + the fact that the character you choose is not the PC but something that possesses the PC.
What made me play Brigandine over and over again?
It wasn't some particular game design. I certainly didn't hold higher respected SRPGs like Fire Emblem, Generation of Chaos and Final Fantasy Tactics to the same nagging of replaying them.
It was that every character was major. Monsters were not only tactical fodders. They were weaved to the narrative PLUS they were dying the more you use them. Then every opponent you had not only had a bio but they were like Scorpion and Sub-zero. Palette swaps that HAD character that seeps into the design.
What made Digimon World 2 more memorable to me than Pokemon despite it's superior design?
Digimon 2 made me feel like I wasn't trading between monsters just for their power.
In Rpg Codex they have a code word for this called storyfag. It means something about a story makes you so forgive them that certain flaws of a game is forgotten.
That "unlocks" memorability.
It's where design makes you forgive story because of gameplay.
It's where design makes you forgive gameplay because of story.
It's where design makes you forgive both because of design.
Off the top of my head some of the major ones are:
-Multiple characters that are actually multiple characters
-Side quests that are not just side quests but dialogue quests
-Random loots
-Mega Map changing designs where entire tiles of the world metamorphs like an apocalypse happening
-Multiple endings
-Character deaths that are not just character deaths but character expositions that suddenly get chopped off because of their deaths
-Sudden Plot Twist
-PC sprite changes
-Tournament of Lifes: things such as competing for gladiators, beauty pageants, politics, rulership, domain
-Puzzles that are weaved to the narrative not just mini-games transposed unto plot
-Combat systems that make you respect a bland mook or whatever opponent you most commonly see
-Level up systems with multiple combinations
See memorability comes when gameplay weaves so much to the task that you often do within the game that it starts to feel like it's story which in turn gets credited for memorable characters/narratives/etc.
The Sims for example are annoying poorly developed bots but why do they seem to have some story?
Because you can make babies (multiple characters), get married and experience the married life (tournament of life) and finally you have this level up system in the form of money that allows you to create the best house or the best hellhouse thus serving the idea of multiple combinations even though there aren't multiclasses.
What made me return to Master of Monsters for the PSX despite the horrible loading times?
Multiple characters that includes introductions for each characters + the fact that the character you choose is not the PC but something that possesses the PC.
What made me play Brigandine over and over again?
It wasn't some particular game design. I certainly didn't hold higher respected SRPGs like Fire Emblem, Generation of Chaos and Final Fantasy Tactics to the same nagging of replaying them.
It was that every character was major. Monsters were not only tactical fodders. They were weaved to the narrative PLUS they were dying the more you use them. Then every opponent you had not only had a bio but they were like Scorpion and Sub-zero. Palette swaps that HAD character that seeps into the design.
What made Digimon World 2 more memorable to me than Pokemon despite it's superior design?
Digimon 2 made me feel like I wasn't trading between monsters just for their power.
In Rpg Codex they have a code word for this called storyfag. It means something about a story makes you so forgive them that certain flaws of a game is forgotten.
That "unlocks" memorability.
It's where design makes you forgive story because of gameplay.
It's where design makes you forgive gameplay because of story.
It's where design makes you forgive both because of design.
Off the top of my head some of the major ones are:
-Multiple characters that are actually multiple characters
-Side quests that are not just side quests but dialogue quests
-Random loots
-Mega Map changing designs where entire tiles of the world metamorphs like an apocalypse happening
-Multiple endings
-Character deaths that are not just character deaths but character expositions that suddenly get chopped off because of their deaths
-Sudden Plot Twist
-PC sprite changes
-Tournament of Lifes: things such as competing for gladiators, beauty pageants, politics, rulership, domain
-Puzzles that are weaved to the narrative not just mini-games transposed unto plot
-Combat systems that make you respect a bland mook or whatever opponent you most commonly see
-Level up systems with multiple combinations
See memorability comes when gameplay weaves so much to the task that you often do within the game that it starts to feel like it's story which in turn gets credited for memorable characters/narratives/etc.
The Sims for example are annoying poorly developed bots but why do they seem to have some story?
Because you can make babies (multiple characters), get married and experience the married life (tournament of life) and finally you have this level up system in the form of money that allows you to create the best house or the best hellhouse thus serving the idea of multiple combinations even though there aren't multiclasses.
Super_Llama
66
author=Dyhalto
What the player is going to remember is the emotions invoked during the game.
This.
I think one of the best examples I can give for this is Skies of Arcadia. There were SO many things wrong with the game: the combat system had massive flaws in it that rendered attack magic damn near useless and led to fights where you just spam the same super moves over and over again, the characters were walking cliches, and so was the plot (naive hero teams up with the childhood friend and the mysterious girl to fight an evil empire trying to collect all the magic MacGuffins and conquer the world.) But the game did such an amazing job at evoking the sense of wonder you'd expect from being a roving free spirit in an age of exploration. The cutscenes had a really great cinematic quality to them, and though you could easily predict everything that happened in the game, when it happened it still hit you hard (the whole subplot with Drachma and Rhaknam being the best example.) When I finally got my island base, I quickly found out that it serves no real purpose other than being another place to find shops and a free inn, and for cutscenes to happen, but dammit I spent so much money upgrading all my buildings to look more awesome even though it was functionally pointless, and I got pissed as hell when the Empire tried to raze it to the ground. And by the end of the game I grew to care a great deal about my giant party of walking cliches and their oh-so-predictable quest.
Large
332
Agreed. Tragedy.
I remember than in Chrono Trigger, the saddest part for me was when I found Belthasar in the future in Nu form. The tragedy of his story, plus the REALLY sad music... oh, that WAS memorable.
I remember than in Chrono Trigger, the saddest part for me was when I found Belthasar in the future in Nu form. The tragedy of his story, plus the REALLY sad music... oh, that WAS memorable.
