Storyline/Plot versus Gameplay/Battle

[Shattered Rift]

I went back-checking three pages of threads until I realized those dated back to last April, though there was a partial discussion concerning this in a thread created by Rodak.

However, in preparation for the creation of my first game (and hoping that I get off my lazy duff), I felt that this was the key point to address and get opinions on. Several excellent RPGs have had very in-depth storylines (Xenosaga, and some of the Final Fantasy games at times). Others, particularly the old-school goodies, focus on gameplay.

Due to the possible repetivity that could occur by all of using the same software to construct our games, plot becomes a distinguising factor. On the other hand, some of you have mentioned doing insane things with the Square Button, leaving innovative gameplay as a real possibility.


Right now, I'm far more inclined to the storyline half of things, and though I'd like to hear discussion from both sides of the issue, I think clarifying "the gray area" would be most beneficial, hopefully to all of us.

To what extent should each aspect exist in a game? During the "introductory" portion of the game, how much storyline is too much? Later on, does a long "cutscene" or the like after a pivotal boss fight leave a satisfying taste, or should the player be taken right back to dungeoning?

It should be noted that the above questions are not necessarily specific, but just key points that I could think of at the moment.

[Rodak]

Read some of our posted reviews in the Contest forum.

You will see that both are important.

In my opinion Story will take the stage provided gameplay works.

I would focus on functionality rather than Gameplay.

If custom things don't work as they are supposed to work, then they stand out more than not having tried to do something custom at all.

Long cut scenes only get boring if it's all talk and no action. Throw in camera work and single actions for characters. Lots of 'em. It keeps each line of dialogue fresh.

I hope that helped.

Peace.

[Bigfoot]

I really just used to use RPG Maker games mainly for cinematic purposes, I really cared less for gameplay.

Now I changed my philosiphy, I will now do twice the work!

I never have really seen a full effort on both sides, and that is my intention with my next game.

[The Smurf]

well, i think both are equally important. you can have an amazing storyline with perfect characters, yet so atrocious gameplay that nobody will want to play. you could have the greatest minigames, button features, and controls but have the worst storyline ever, to the point where nobody will want to play.

personally (in just about everything) i like to see proportion and balance. too much of one thing is just as bad as too little. balance is key.

but, maybe i'm just crazy.


-the smurf

[christi]

definitely a good balance of both. and variety. lots of variety.

to me, a good rpg is like a good haunted house... you're on the edge of your seat, you know something's going to happen, but you never know just what, or to what degree... it's too dark to see what's in front of you, and there are just enough quiet corridors to lure you into a false sense of security.

how much storyline is too much? can you make your player laugh, or even cry, over pixels and polygons? or are they mashing the "X" button the nanosecond a blue dialogue box comes up? as long as the story you're telling is holding your players' attention, the length of it is irrelevent.

but this is where balance comes in... tell your story a bit at a time, regardless of how long it takes. throw some gameplay in between pivotal events for variety. no shoving players headfirst into hour-long cutscenes that they have no way of pausing, skipping, or otherwise getting out of.

a good rule of thumb? if the player is mashing the "X" button, be it during battle or dialogue, something needs to change. it's like driving a stick shift... you have to just "feel" it.

[Shattered Rift]

Rodak, I think you've said it best, covering the importance of functionality, as well as offering the solution to alleviate the "X-button mashing" that Christi brought up.

Smurf, I owe you a thanks. Two hours of playing your Genesis Chronicle has reminded me that the old-school games didn't require fancy plots or ones that even made sense.


Could I hear some opinions about setting up the beginning of a game, story/plot-wise? Ideally, the player should be able to get into battle, or into the outside world rather quickly (the first Final Fantasy seems to make the best example of this). I'm really worried that none of the plot ideas I've ever came up with need just too much setting up before allowing the player to take charge of things.

I know it's a bit cheesy, but does flash-backing sound like a bad idea to possibly work around this concern? How long could be spent at the beginning of a game in an introduction, and then in the first town, before going out and "exploring" the world (or at least a dungeon)?

[Rodak]

shatteredrift said:

I know it's a bit cheesy, but does flash-backing sound like a bad idea to possibly work around this concern? How long could be spent at the beginning of a game in an introduction, and then in the first town, before going out and "exploring" the world (or at least a dungeon)?

There is no one answer.

I like to just dive right in and learn the back story by talking to people.

An opening cartoon is always fun.

I don't think I've ever seen a game actually begin in battle. That might be fun if you feel you are going to have a long intro and want people to be able to do something early on.

Flashing back is always a good trick. The trick is finding a good point from which to flash back. Maybe right before the final boss fight as opposed to old age. That way the story continues after coming full circle.

It's all just a matter of taste.

Good Luck with it.

Peace.

[DarkHorizons]

I gotta vote for story driven RPG's, at least where RPGM2 is concerned, since we all use the same software. When I think back on all the great RPG's I've played, Final Fantasy 7(my favorite of all time) comes to mind.
Each character had their own back story, and eventually all interconnected with one another. A story where everyone in it suffers, or is concerned, is pivotal for me. Motivation for your characters is essential.
I think what goes deeper than actual story is how much I'll like the characters I play. I want to care about them and feel like I want them to achieve the best results on their journey.

I think gamers may be stuck in some cement filled cliche's. I'd like to see some originality for this. I don't mind the "saving the world" deal, because that the facet to any good RPG, cause it centers on motivation. But the lazy kid who becomes a super poweed knight because of a mystical sword, and pursues the evil lord(sorry if these are some of your stories) doesn't do it for me.

This is my reason for creating a Sci-fi RPG. It hasn't been done all to hell.Plus my characters will be alien-by origin, so I border on uniqeness, character wise.

I'm all about innovation gameplay wise. If someone can make the [] button make me look in first person, or use a special healing technique, all the better, but if all this innovation is a top priority over an interesting and somewhat unique story, than I'll be impressed for a very short time.

I think cutscenes are essential to RPG's, to push the story along and give me meaning for playing someons game. Hell, a good part of my game is heavily cutscened. Nothing excrusiatingly long but I want the player to care about my characters, their journey, and the story.
I think this is where I excel because of my background in journalism and writing. The overall functionality, well thats why you guys are here..lol.

[Shattered Rift]

rodak said:

I like to just dive right in and learn the back story by talking to people.

The more I think about that, having NPCs actually tell something significant, even if unimportant to further the game, might have made some of the oldest RPGs far more in-depth. I think when I get around to making a game, I'm going to try to rely heavily on that to counter-act my natural tendency to have things well-explained (and, unless I'm careful, over-explained).

Dark, how much of a fan of the older RPGs are you? (Final Fantasy and Final Fantasy IV (or II, as most of us more readily remember it), Dragon Warrior I and II, Phantasy Star I through IV, or any of the Saga games on Game Boy ported to the US and dubbed as Final Fantasy games.)

Were/are you a fan of any of those older, more basic RPGs, or is it only the level of plot that came in the Playstation RPGs that finally made it worthwhile to you? Perhaps I should ask which you'd prefer to play more?

[DarkHorizons]

Well I'm 37 years old, so i've probably played those games you mentioned more times than you've blinked..(old man joke)

I liked those games for the time they were out and although they were in a more simplistic time in history they are none-the less classics.

I bring FF7 up mostly of how it effected me emotionally. I've never been brought closer to tears from any game than FF7(you know the part). As well as the excellent character portrayal. although the games you mentioned had good stories, none seemed to make stick with me over the years.

If I want a semi passive story, I'd go with the older FF. For their time they were great and some of the characters are classic. But during the Playstion RPG era, more things were brought into the light. More topics could be added to RPG's today than in the older years.
But if I want a game to wow me, than the games of today suffice. I can overlook crappy gameplay if the story intrigues me and the quest of the party isn't generic.

I've had every"American" system ever made at one time or another and played almost every "American RPG" game realeased. So have been imprisioned to the dark recessess of my mind, and some, like FF7,Dragon quests,LOD, still inspire me.

[Shattered Rift]

It looks like we're a bit on opposite ends of things, then. I wasn't referring specifically to the plots of the RPGs I listed, but rather, the fact that they didn't entirely need plots. Something in the gameplay of each was solid, and that got them by.

My natural inclination is to focus on the plots, since I was inspired to start working on some ideas when I saw the first RPG Maker on the PSX (though I might have started working on the ideas slightly before that... I don't quite recall for certain). However, this discussion (as well as a two hour trip through the first part of Smurf's Genesis Chronicle) have convinced me to focus first on a stable gameplay and battle foundation, before indulging in the storyline that I'll likely be more eager to work on.

[MC Solidus]

I think you need a good balance of both, but I personally lean more towards story. But, there are games out there with good innovative gameplay that go with little or no storyline, and still turn out great.

I like good storylines, but mostly cause I can't really do good gameplay stuff yet. Hopefully, I can create a good balance of the two on my military game.

[vespuleth]

doansdomain.proboards27.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=creative&thread=1100329264&page=1

i hate plugging my own stuff, but i suggest that topic because of the thoughts expressed that werent mine as well as those that were. (its a really old topic). im a writer and programmer, and my idea of special features is stuff that makes the game feel good and is possibly not noticed by the player. im all about story though.

[Neo Samurai]

The more I think about that, having NPCs actually tell something significant, even if unimportant to further the game, might have made some of the oldest RPGs far more in-depth.

You should play the Lunar games. The NPCs usually gave you hints of where to go next, but it was interesting, and funny. At least, I believed it to be so.

Anyway, I agree that you need a balance of both as well. I believe FF7 accomplished both of this. It had a great storyline that truly moved you (better than most movies I see now a days) and fun aspects of gameplay [battle system, minigames (how many of you spent a good couple of hours playing the motorcycle minigame? ;D), etc.].

You see, you can get people into your game with only one aspect to your game, but if you truly want to create a great game that people will remember, you should add both aspects to it (sounds kind of funny that you could create such a game with RPGM2, but if FF7 can create a deep storyline using lego-like character and have fun gameplay, so can RPGM2).