I don't get why is it that every couple of years someone claims to be making a game that will change the game industry forever by talking about story telling, yetevery time they come up with an interactive movie which is pretty much the exact same thing as any FMVs from the '90s, including all the wrong aspects (mainly the fact that an interactive movie has much less interactiveness than any other game). Fahrenheit suffered from this very same thing.

It's unnerving because good story telling is nothing new and it can be done to great effect without taking anything out from a game. There are many good examples on this very site such as the Gabriel Knight saga.

It is pretty good, imho a big improvement on Fallout 3. 100 hrs later, If you enjoyed the original game, the Dead Money and Old World Blues DLC's are worth a look. OWB is much larger and well made but Dead Money is ok too and they are connected by the same storyline. Honest Hearts sounded promising but came up a bit shorthanded in the end, imho. Haven't played Lonesome Road yet so can't say.

Agreed, the issue is the gaming people should have a choice. Making a game enable you to play through an exciting story costs effort and money, and you also have to spend on graphic engine etc. So it's important economically to show there is demand and that we're hungry for more than just some particular thing. Otherwise everyone will find it optimal to make COD/dominant alternative. We have to make sure there is a market for sophisticated stuff. And DRM-free stuff. And that's what makes me spend a little shy of $200 on GOG's xmas sale (and everyone in my family thinks I'm crazy :)).

With you on Gabriel Knight. Amazing games/stories.

What the fuck is a 'naughty dog' ?

Exactly, I agree 100%. I have written an article some years ago about "interactive movies" (I would link you to it but it's in Spanish) which pretty much says exactly what you are saying now. The whole interactive movies genre has been a walking paradox since the very beggining of it (the Dragon's Lair games) because by calling it an "interactive movie" they claim it has more depth than any regular game and yet pretty much every game of this kind has a lack of interactiveness with its own world that it's appaling. Even with today's interactive movies such as Dreamfall and Fahrenheit. One would think they have had the time to learn something but they keep failing every time.

Regular adventure games have always been an amazing way to tell a great story in a videogame without actually losing anything from it. Past that, good stories can be told successfully in many other genres; Half-Life is a good example of this, even Darwinia.

"Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie. It's expected to be there, but it's not that important."

Crude, but to the point. Games are about interactivity. As such stories are not what games do best. If you have a powerful story you need share with others, matching it to a more appropriate medium would be wise.

That's not to say stories can't be good in a supporting role to gameplay. But one must be cautious as it's very easy to go overboard and have the player throwing physics objects at the actors in frustration. A little spice can go a long way.

i PLAY games for fun and action. If i want a cheezy story, then i'll watch a movie or read a book. i'm not interested in a father/daughter love story thats going to be their next game, good luck with that, you're going to need it, Jeez cant they come up with a better game? Are you kidding me? Give the budget to a good indie developer and imagine what cool game they would make?

What?

For me, the story is the main thing. Gameplay and music comes then, and graphics last. But the story is the one.

What I find funny, is that when asked what do you like about older games, many of you answer "story" or "plot"

How come that is not that important in new games then?

"Mame please step out of the car and put your hands behind your back. We're going to have to do a complete cavity search for narcotics." Some porn movies have great stories!

LOL, just kidding. I agree with you. I usually skip the story in the games that i play because i really dont care and after finishing the game, i dont remember the story anyway. i PLAY games for fun and action not for the story.

Story in a game and porn is a Carmack quote. Ironically last time I checked Mobygames the summary of Wolfenstein 3D plot and characters was longer than the entire description of Fallout 2.

I'd be afraid to google that too. ;)
Interesting. Would you find a "Let's Play" video of game from a skillfull/ entertaining player more enjoyable than playing it yourself? I know I screw up the scripting in games constantly.

Who says i'm not a skillful and/or entertaining player?

no because part of how the game tells the story is by making you believe you are in that world, experiencing those events.

if i'm watching a video it's not ME experiencing that story.

and i want to enjoy the story in my own way.. like you say some people go screw around with physics.. thats not fun for me.. and in RPG's i want the story to revolve around the character i create, not what some other guy creates..

and i myself tend not to fuck about, i stay on the path of the game, and generally always look where the dev would want me to look, and follow the path set as the optimal for story progression

How do you know you look the right way?

Making games less interactive doesn't make their plot any better

try running through HL2 and see how many important things you miss by looking in all directions