It seems to me that there is a constant imbalance in video games. Games tend to either focus on story or gameplay. Rarely is a balance struck. It is not impossible to create a game with both engaging mechanics and story, it has been done before. However, developers seem to sacrifice one for the sake of the other.
A while back, I decided to play all the way through the first Bayonetta. It was sitting in my backlog, and I decided to dust it off. Bayonetta is a game that has really well made game mechanics, and it is a lot of fun to play. However, I couldn't understand a lick of what was going on in the story. That being said, the game had loads of style, but it lacked substance. I wasn't quite sure of any of the characters motivations, save for one who wasn't even the main character. On the other end of things, the controls and combat of Bayonetta were fantastic. Button presses felt responsive, and when I failed, I knew it was my own fault. The game challenged me more than most other games do. To the point where I'd like to revisit the game so that I can improve my score and earn higher ranks. It's a lot of fun to play Bayonetta, but I just don't quite understand why I was doing the things that I was in the game.
On the other side of the spectrum, there is The Wolf Among Us. A game by Telltale Games, which I completed a longer time ago. This game stuck with me because of it's well written characters, dialogue, and plot. A friend of mine had the game as well, and we were both in the process of playing through the game as the episodes were being released. After each installment we would geek out about what happened in that episode and the different choices that we made. That was a fun experience. Telltale has a crew of extremely talented writers and bring a lot to the table when it comes to engaging their audience. However the one thing about the game that didn't shine as bright, were the gameplay mechanics. The gameplay was broken up into two different segments: searching for clues in crime scenes, and quick time events. Searching for clues feels a bit clunky, and sometimes I made mistakes in interacting with certain objects because it was not clearly communicated to me what he button I pressed would do. The quick time events in the game were worse. At times, the game would ask the player to swipe the right control stick in a specific direction, or pull the left trigger, as is the standard for quick time events. However the game would forgive me, as I would move the left stick instead of the right, or pull the right trigger instead of the left. Quick time events are never fun, and never seem to work properly. The gameplay didn't seem to reflect the character of Bigby Wolf, the games protagonist and player character. Bigby may be strong headed and can make snap decisions at times, as he is often faced with these, but I could tell from his character and how he acted that he wanted to do things right and that he wanted to take his time. Most quick time events were action sequences, though I feel that they could have been executed a bit better by giving me more control over the sequences, as opposed to playing a forgiving game of Simon Says.
So then, what does a balance between story and gameplay look like? How is it executed? What games showcase this? To be honest, I'm not quite sure. I've played lots of games that really had an impact on me, but did they have that balance between story and gameplay?
I think that games strike this balance when the character is shown through the actions and animations that the characters perform. Joel of The Last of Us is a good example of this. I like Joel as a character because I see it in the way that he moves about the game. I see his brutality in the way that he takes out the enemies that stand in front of him. Even when he has the drop on them, he still ferociously brings them down. Or when Joel enters a fist fight; each one is tense, and each blow can be felt with a certain kind of "oomph". Each thrown punch was meant to do some damage. There is a certain kind of desperation to the way that Joel moves and attacks. The same can be said for the supporting character Ellie. There is a point in the game where players can take on the role of Ellie, and it plays out in much the same way. Ellie is only a 14 year old girl, and she skirts past enemies, in an attempt to go unnoticed. When Ellie has her shot to take down an enemy, she leaps on their back like an animal and tossed about as the enemy attempts to throw her off. Ellie's switchblade being her only point to hold on to as she stabs again and again into the chest of her enemy. It is vicious, and it is difficult to watch, as this girl might not be able to take down her foe. In Ellie's movements, there is fragility, and that same desperation to survive, just as Joel. Both of these characters shine in both cut-scenes and gameplay, and we as the audience get to take them in.
Another example of character and story meshing together is Spec Ops: The Line. This was a gmae that went rather unnoticed, despite the massive praise from critiques. Most of that praise came from how the game delivered it's story and characters. The character that stands out the most is the one which the players control. Captain Walker, voiced by the talented Nolan North, is a soldier of the Delta Force who was to survey Dubai after a catastrophic sandstorm nearly destroyed the entire city. His orders were to call for support when he determined that it was time to extract civilians. Instead, Captain Walker decided to go on a conquest to rescue a general that he once served under. In this crusade, Walker chooses to take many actions to justify his end goal. Players see how this affects not only his outward appearance, but his persona as well. Captain Walker evolves from soldier to psychopath. Walker is ruthless in his pursuit to accomplish his mission, and it takes its toll on him. His uniform becomes tattered and torn, and instead of trying to resolve any conflict that comes his way with tact or stealth, by the end of the game he actively seeks it out, and mercilessly kills anything that stands in front of him.
Let's move on to something a bit more lighthearted. Shadow of the Colossus is a game about Stabbius Horatio McDudeman III Esq. and his quest to stab big monsters with a sword that he stole in an effort to raise a girl from the dead. Well, the main character's name is actually Wander, but that's only mentioned in the instruction manual that nobody reads, so it doesn't count. What I like about Shadow of the Colossus is how it demonstrates character. Wander, or SHMDIII, is not a soldier. He is not coordinated, and I'm pretty sure that he hasn't hunted a day in his life, but he can shoot a bow with the best of them. The game illustrates this by the way that the character stumbles about when he's attempting to walk on one of the sixteen hulking beasts. When standing idol, players can swing Wander's sword, which he does with very little finesse. It's almost forced, and it looks like he nearly throws out his shoulder in the process. Shadow of The Colossus showcases character in its nonhuman characters as well. Agro is your horse that is miraculously with you through all of the crazy stuff that you have to do in the game. I'm not an expert on horses, but I'm pretty sure they would bolt after having to help me fight the second Colossus, but for some reason this horse stands by you through the thick and thin. Agro is definitely Wander's horse, and is as loyal as they come. Another example of nonhuman characters, are the Colossi themselves. Each one has a distinct personality. So far as you can tell, they were just minding their own business until this kid with a sword shows up on their doorstep. Some just kind of fly about, others just stare at you, others try and kill you immediately. They may literally be stone faced creatures, but they have character. This helps to tell their stories. There is a reason why the bird Colossus just sits atop its perch, there is a reason why Agro always comes back, there is a reason why Wander has no idea how to properly use a sword.
Meshing both story and gameplay together helps to make a game more of an immersive experience. This is what games need to strive for, if they are to tell a compelling narrative.
On the other hand, I don't think that every game should be striving to accomplish equilibrium between gameplay and story. Some games just put the story on the back burner and let that set as the extremely vague reason for why the characters are doing what they do. John Carmack said that his design philosophy was that game story should be like that of a porn-o, it should only serve as the setting for the action in the game. I'm not a huge fan of that notion, however there are some games where it works. I certainly don't want to become emotionally attached to the block in Tetris, those things leave as soon as they arrive. There's also Super Meat Boy, where the game does just that. The reason for Super Meat Boy to run through these super complex levels full of saw-blades and pain is as simple as "get the girl". I'm not even sure why I do half of the stuff that I do in Just Cause 2. Well, I guess the answer is in the title on that one.
Not all games need to have an engaging story, and some games don't need to have super tight gameplay. If a story is good enough, it can trump how the game plays. The same goes for a game that is fun to play. Games are art, and they can be whatever they want to be. Though, in my opinion, a game is a masterpiece when everything comes together to make a cohesive whole.
(This song has nothing to do with video games, and the meshing of gameplay and story, but it's just my jam right now)
No comments:
Post a Comment