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)
SO MAYBE WE SHOULD LOWER OUR STANDARDS A TAD.
Posts
kentona
View playlists
CloseThis is from my FUN articles:
Is this structure such a bad thing? I mean, it is timeworn and heavily overused, but should that count that much against it? It's common for a reason (though I don't have a psychology degree to explain why that is) so there must be something attractive about it beyond the ease of implementation.
I just feel that enjoying stories with Good Guy defeating Ultimate Evil against All Odds is practically ingrained in our genetic code. We shouldn't feel bad for appealing to that.
Stock Story Convention
RPGs have long been praised for their great stories. The long, narrative driven structure puts RPGs in an excellent position to invoke innovative, creative, moving stories. This is rarely, if ever, the case. For the most part RPGs use stock story structures and attempt only to improve on the telling of that archetype.
I'll let you decide if this is a good or a bad thing, but this is the typical structure of your typical RPG:
1. The protagonist
2. The girl
3. Sidekicks
4. The betrayal
5. The hidden evil
The protangonist (usually a male) is marked by an exceptional birth, and possesses some quality that sets him apart from his peers. Often he is the quiet type (if not completely mute) and his personality is blank slate. The underlying assumption is that you are this avatar, thus it is you that is in the story.
This main character will meet up with his soon to be significant other. This oft female character will be a sorceress, a healer, a summoner, or some other sort of spell hurling heroine. In most cases she will also be marked at birth. The two, while clearly in love, will not confess their feelings until the game is over.
Additional sidekicks will join our hero, and are often of stock types - the silent, strong bruiser, the impetuous and brash young girl, the cunning thief with a surprisingly warm heart, etc...
A betrayal will happen eventually - count on it. All too often it is by a trusted member of your party, but occasionally you will instead be betrayed by an NPC.
The bad guy is never quite what you think, and neither is the story. There is always the Bigger Evil. The story will unfold and the player will realize that the evil king, queen, wizard, duke etc., is simply a pawn for a far more sinister evil wizard, demon, king, duke, or otherworldly monstrosity. In all likelihood this process will duplicate itself several times until at last our hero confronts the puppet master at the root of the current evil. Roll end credits.
Is this structure a good thing? It is quite easy to pull off, and it must be somewhat attractive because it is quite common. Also, it works as a story structure, even if it is often cliche. That may just be enough for amateur games, but you should strive for more or at least recognize and reconcile yourself with the timeworn story.
Is this structure such a bad thing? I mean, it is timeworn and heavily overused, but should that count that much against it? It's common for a reason (though I don't have a psychology degree to explain why that is) so there must be something attractive about it beyond the ease of implementation.
I just feel that enjoying stories with Good Guy defeating Ultimate Evil against All Odds is practically ingrained in our genetic code. We shouldn't feel bad for appealing to that.
author=WIP link=topic=1340.msg20429#msg20429 date=1213722088
I think the biggest failure with games in the community is the way the story is approached. It isn't about the game's story so much as its implementation into the game.
Skies of Arcadia is a shining example of this. At first glance the story is stock and standard, but the way the game presents it makes it incredible.
Jabbo
140
I guess the problem isn't the fundamental story structure so much as it is people who try to implement it and end up with really bad dialogue. I mean really, the girl doesn't have to be Princess Peach. The villain doesn't have to say "mwa ha ha." Sometimes people don't even try to hear their characters talk and just put down anything for dialogue. Couple that with a stock story and you get bad.
Honestly though, if you're capable of writing a story that isn't cliche, you probably should. It's just... your moral duty as an artist, I guess.
Honestly though, if you're capable of writing a story that isn't cliche, you probably should. It's just... your moral duty as an artist, I guess.
Shadowtext
120
author=Feldschlacht IV link=topic=1340.msg20469#msg20469 date=1213740851I don't know if Skies of Arcadia is a good example to go by, though. Skies of Arcadia isn't just stock and standard at first glance....in basically every way, it should be a mediocre game. But through some sort of sorcery that I don't understand, it's so charming that you forgive it. It's a pure "B" game. Infinitely lovable not in spite of its failings but almost because of them, and yet it's an unironic sort of appreciation. It's camp. Pure camp, not the diluted sort of camp you get when people confuse enjoying camp with appreciating something sarcastically. Camp that comes from passionate failure, and is endearing precisely because it tries so hard but doesn't quite pull it off.author=WIP link=topic=1340.msg20429#msg20429 date=1213722088
I think the biggest failure with games in the community is the way the story is approached. It isn't about the game's story so much as its implementation into the game.
Skies of Arcadia is a shining example of this. At first glance the story is stock and standard, but the way the game presents it makes it incredible.
In other words, I don't think Skies of Arcadia should be a role model for game makers because it's almost impossible to make quality camp on purpose. If you want to make quality camp, you have to shoot for the moon. You've got to be Peter Molyneux in ambition and Ed Wood in execution.
I don't think that's a trick that can be taught. I mean I'm not saying it's intrinsic in the sense of being magically gifted to people at birth, but it's sort of a knack that I think can only be developed serendipitously.
S. F. LaValle
1069
Running with a previous example, Chrono Trigger has made fans out of most of us, I'd wager. Absolutely everyone (I don't think there's much exception here, let me know if I'm wrong) has wanted to play another game like it, because combo techs are just fun as hell. No one even realizes how simple the story is until they are forced to think about it. Yep, it's a game about teens that stumble onto a time warp and uncover an alien threat that must be destroyed. With a mute hero, to boot, which may be part of the reason why it all works.
What makes this game so lovable? The plot. The plot of this game is almost flawlessly intertwined with its gameplay. Story sequences play out; all of a sudden, there's a timewarp, and the heroes jump through; the player is not the least bit concerned about the fate of the heroes because he or she is eagerly awaiting to explore a new area and meet new characters, learn new combo techs. The same type of emphasis on gameplay plot over story exists with DQ7, albeit not as universally loved. Once people understand the gimmick, they look forward to moving on through the story for the purpose of reaching new islands, learning how they were destroyed, and then rescuing them.
Here's what I interpret from "lowering standards": You don't need to sacrifice any degree of quality you think you may have with your game. If you think your story is the only part of your game that has quality, then it might not need to be a game at all (see RM fics, link Brickroad's Maranda). If you want to actually make a game, your story doesn't need to be amazing. It could just be a series of events that move the player from your caves to your towers, where the meat of the game is experienced.
For the majority of us that want that balance in between...it's easy to lose perspective, and that's talked about a lot here. A sprawling epic of a story is difficult, especially when you need to pace gameplay throughout its entirety, and they are rarely completed. It's not impossible, however, or even improbable, it just takes time. If you want to spend a lot more time on your project than most people are willing to, don't let anyone stop you. If you have doubts about your story, then I think "lowering your standards" is sound advice; concentrate on making the game fun, use the gameplay as your boundaries, and you can build a fun, if not Shakespearean, story that brings it all together.
Sorry if I lose focus now and then, it's really late.
What makes this game so lovable? The plot. The plot of this game is almost flawlessly intertwined with its gameplay. Story sequences play out; all of a sudden, there's a timewarp, and the heroes jump through; the player is not the least bit concerned about the fate of the heroes because he or she is eagerly awaiting to explore a new area and meet new characters, learn new combo techs. The same type of emphasis on gameplay plot over story exists with DQ7, albeit not as universally loved. Once people understand the gimmick, they look forward to moving on through the story for the purpose of reaching new islands, learning how they were destroyed, and then rescuing them.
Here's what I interpret from "lowering standards": You don't need to sacrifice any degree of quality you think you may have with your game. If you think your story is the only part of your game that has quality, then it might not need to be a game at all (see RM fics, link Brickroad's Maranda). If you want to actually make a game, your story doesn't need to be amazing. It could just be a series of events that move the player from your caves to your towers, where the meat of the game is experienced.
For the majority of us that want that balance in between...it's easy to lose perspective, and that's talked about a lot here. A sprawling epic of a story is difficult, especially when you need to pace gameplay throughout its entirety, and they are rarely completed. It's not impossible, however, or even improbable, it just takes time. If you want to spend a lot more time on your project than most people are willing to, don't let anyone stop you. If you have doubts about your story, then I think "lowering your standards" is sound advice; concentrate on making the game fun, use the gameplay as your boundaries, and you can build a fun, if not Shakespearean, story that brings it all together.
Sorry if I lose focus now and then, it's really late.
Erave
1444
I don't get why GW keeps talking about people making shitty stories when they all circle jerk over 15 minute throwaway games where you jump from building to buildings.
With that said, I think just do what you can. I think keeping it simple and presenting it in an interesting way works. Also, hold the pretension unless you can pull it off effectively.
GW fails to realize that lots of RPG games with TERRIBLE stories were fun and great. Earthbound, Chrono Trigger, and other more classic games. Why don't they acknowledge this?
With that said, I think just do what you can. I think keeping it simple and presenting it in an interesting way works. Also, hold the pretension unless you can pull it off effectively.
GW fails to realize that lots of RPG games with TERRIBLE stories were fun and great. Earthbound, Chrono Trigger, and other more classic games. Why don't they acknowledge this?
It also needs to be realized that many of these 'terrible' stories aren't so terrible! Remember, we're not in a graduate studies literature class, we're playing video games! It can be said that plots like Chrono Trigger, Xenogears, Alundra, Suikoden and the like have great stories. After all, wouldn't it be mostly agreed that games like Alundra 2, Beyond the Beyond, and a few others have 'terrible' stories? If I can enjoy the story, especially relative to other stories, then it isn't all that 'terrible', if
'terrible' at all.
'terrible' at all.
The attitude at GW is disgusting. Those guys don't produce anything, they just bitch. Bitch if it's too short, bitch if it's too long. Bitch if the hero is too generic, bitch if the hero is too weird.
But mostly... bitch if the story is simple/minimalistic... Bitch if the story is complex...
But mostly... bitch if the story is simple/minimalistic... Bitch if the story is complex...
The worst part about that is that in GW, most of the complaining is done by people outside of the game making scene and people that have no intention of ever being a part of it. They stomp over to the G&D forums to complain and criticize about games they'll never take out the time to play. It's like bandits coming down from the mountains to raid a village.
In effect, an attitude of "watch and never do" attitude has been growing over at GW and almost the entire scene. Basically, people just critique on work they've seen but haven't played. "Ugh, that looks terrible/generic/retarded/gay" comments on games they have no intention to play. Unfortunately, this even extends to the positive comments. People swing by Demo and Advert topics, read (or not even really read) the topic, post a "sounds/looks good", and never visit/notice the game again, much less play it. People actually playing other peoples games is a rarity. In fact, if it wasn't for the Screenshot topics, God knows what would happen.
This has to stop.
In effect, an attitude of "watch and never do" attitude has been growing over at GW and almost the entire scene. Basically, people just critique on work they've seen but haven't played. "Ugh, that looks terrible/generic/retarded/gay" comments on games they have no intention to play. Unfortunately, this even extends to the positive comments. People swing by Demo and Advert topics, read (or not even really read) the topic, post a "sounds/looks good", and never visit/notice the game again, much less play it. People actually playing other peoples games is a rarity. In fact, if it wasn't for the Screenshot topics, God knows what would happen.
This has to stop.
demondestiny
889
author=harmonic link=topic=1340.msg20511#msg20511 date=1213768870
The attitude at GW is disgusting. Those guys don't produce anything, they just bitch. Bitch if it's too short, bitch if it's too long. Bitch if the hero is too generic, bitch if the hero is too weird.
But mostly... bitch if the story is simple/minimalistic... Bitch if the story is complex...
And that's what's good about this forum site. We give each other constructive feedback in order for us to improve on our games. And who gives a shit anyway about what the character looks like or if the story is to cliche etc. That's all i ever read on GW.
VideoWizard
2842
I knew it. I wasn't lying when I left GW in 2006 that 'Dragon Kingdoms V' isn't their kind of game. I got a good laugh at the Chosen One defeating the Ultimate Evil, Against All Odds. And you collect shards instead of crystals, hardly a difference.
Of course, considering what type of games are their kind of games, this may not be a bad thing. After all, these "plain vanilla" games are actually quite rare these days.
Of course, considering what type of games are their kind of games, this may not be a bad thing. After all, these "plain vanilla" games are actually quite rare these days.
I knew it. I wasn't lying when I left GW in 2006 that 'Dragon Kingdoms V' isn't their kind of game. I got a good laugh at the Chosen One defeating the Ultimate Evil, Against All Odds. And you collect shards instead of crystals, hardly a difference.
Wait, huh? Maybe it's because it's late, but I'm not sure what you're saying here. Call me stupid, but can you rephrase?
Erave
1444
The best part is that the main culprits are guys who have no interest in making games...but your game better be a work of art or ...else.
Neophyte
155
I think it has to do more with who is more well known in a community more than anything else(which I think applies to all communities). If your with the "in" crowd, the more attention your project seems to receive.
I've tried to lower my standards, but I really can't. If a game doesn't capture my attention within the first 5 minutes I shut it off. I can't stand stupid intros with text scrolling about some random war that I don't care about.
By the way if the game is fun, I don't care if it has the worst storyline ever. It's fun, which is all that matters to me. The story does have the potential to make things more interesting, though.
But I agree with WIP. Integration is the key that most people seem to lack.
I've tried to lower my standards, but I really can't. If a game doesn't capture my attention within the first 5 minutes I shut it off. I can't stand stupid intros with text scrolling about some random war that I don't care about.
By the way if the game is fun, I don't care if it has the worst storyline ever. It's fun, which is all that matters to me. The story does have the potential to make things more interesting, though.
But I agree with WIP. Integration is the key that most people seem to lack.
I've tried to lower my standards, but I really can't. If a game doesn't capture my attention within the first 5 minutes I shut it off. I can't stand stupid intros with text scrolling about some random war that I don't care about.
Well, that's not really what I mean by 'lowering your standards'. I see what you're trying to say.
Neophyte
155
I guess you mean in terms of story telling right? I edited my other post a bit, so you could get a better idea of what I meant.
Basically if the game is fun, I don't care if it's saving the world from Neclord the evil demon. As long as I'm enjoying the game I'm satisfied.
Basically if the game is fun, I don't care if it's saving the world from Neclord the evil demon. As long as I'm enjoying the game I'm satisfied.
B-but guys. They don't say "fag" anymore! They are changing!
...
Read my previous posts for actual content.
...
Read my previous posts for actual content.
demondestiny
889
author=Neophyte link=topic=1340.msg20523#msg20523 date=1213772711
I guess you mean in terms of story telling right? I edited my other post a bit, so you could get a better idea of what I meant.
Basically if the game is fun, I don't care if it's saving the world from Neclord the evil demon. As long as I'm enjoying the game I'm satisfied.
Yeah, i don't really have any standards for games. So long as the gameplay is good and the story is entertaining i'm happy.
