Quake3World

I guess they revised their stance since a recent quakecon when they said "we don't do stories" or something similar.

Yes a very interesting read there Memphis

... and interesting Doom Days ahead

i'm wondering if this was a "leak"

maybe id didn't want the news to get out by some author posting on his blog about what his current employment is

Well, they said they had professional script writers for the story of Doom 3 as well, and while that had a lot more depth than the original Doom, it didn't go much beyond the original Half-Life.

Another thing I find odd is how there was this huge fight about whether or not they should do Doom 3 back when Paul Steed was fired (because of that discussion) and now they're doing a Doom 4 like it's the most logical thing to do.

After Dead Space, Doom 4 has a Hellknight sized shit pile to catch up with.

Dead Space wasn't perfect, but it made Doom 3 look like Doom 2, story wise.

So yeah, all id Software have to do is rip off Event Horizon... With zombies. Its not THAT hard. If Paul Anderson can make a good movie, then surely this guy can plot a half decent game...?

why always hire awardwinning authors who made 239 novels bestsellers and pulitzers? it sounds nice marketingwise but the games with the best stories had unknown storywriters. prolly cause they are more in touch with the actual product, not sure.

on topic;

How many times has a game proclaimed its cinematic virtues – epic story, Hollywood-grade (or at least, prime-time TV quality) voice actors in a staggering production of unparalleled genius? Then, when we sit down with the final game, the story and dialogue plods along limply before fizzling like bad internet fan fiction? There's nothing that can deflate the overall authenticity and quality of a game's setting than a poorly written story, sub-comic book pulp dialogue and bad cliche after bad cliche.

Solution? The writing department in your average developer is usually a tiny fraction the size of design, and many staffers end up wearing multiple hats in writing roles – spending time creating manuals and support documents as much as creating a compelling setting. More focus on the writing process and creating a compelling world can pull a game out of mediocrity and make up for any visual shortcomings. Great examples are Braid, the Baldur's Gate series, the GTA series and just about everything that came out of the minds of Tim Schafer and Ron Gilbert. You don't need A-list celebrities to tell a great story.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/944/944828p1.html

o'dium wrote:Dead Space wasn't perfect, but it made Doom 3 look like Doom 2, story wise.

I'll have to disagree with that. I played through Dead Space twice now and I can't remember there being much of a plot. Mars station full of people who turn into monsters, try to find way off station, decide to close hell portal instead. Derelict space station full of monsters, find girlfriend, oops... she's already dead. Not saying one is better than the other (I enjoyed both) just that there wasn't much 'plot' to either game.

MKJ wrote:why always hire awardwinning authors who made 239 novels bestsellers and pulitzers? it sounds nice marketingwise but the games with the best stories had unknown storywriters. prolly cause they are more in touch with the actual product, not sure.

IMO, game developers haven't quite found the right formula to integrate pieces of a plot into a game while maintaining the pace of the game. For games to be fun, you need to keep up a certain level of excitement or "adrenaline rush" to keep the player going. While plots may be interesting to create that "immersion" experience, one of the ways it is used incorrectly is that it becomes too much of a focus and actually slows gameplay down. When you start to pause the action and switch completely to plot, your excitement level drops significantly and the game has to start building that up again later.

Take Doom 3 for example, while playing it I felt a certain level of adrenaline when the hell portal opened up and people started turning into demons and I had to start blasting people while the station was being torn apart. Even in quiet dark hallways, the suspense of expecting something to jump out at me kept my adrenaline level pretty high. But every once in a while, I'd pick up a PDA (a plot mechanic) and my progress stops. I'd find a quiet corner of a room that I cleared out and sit there and read it. That stops progression of the game and my adrenaline levels goes down. The audio logs worked better, since you could listen to them and gun at the same time.

In game cutscenes are another plot mechanic I dislike, since when one plays and takes control away from you, you tend to sit back, relax and watch the whole thing, not to mention the fact that the "out of body" experience ruins immersion. There's no reason why they can't make a lot of pretty action sequences while keeping the controls in your hands and few games do this well. Star Wars Republic Commando did the plot thing really well, there was only one cutscene in the game (right in the beginning and even that, they kept it in first person and you could look around freely) and they kept the immersion by keeping you in the helmet of the commando the entire game while action sequences took place around you. It made you feel like you were a real Republic Commando and it kept the pace going with a sense of urgency.

If you've ever watched a DVD with a "cutting room floor" feature in the bonus content, you'll find a lot of interesting scenes in the movie that were cut out. Many of these really help to further explain the plot or add extra depth to the plot or characters, but the director cut them out, often because it was considered to be too slow, not entirely relevant, or distracts from the main progression of the plot. Because so much more work goes into creating a particular 'scene' of a game, it's hard for game developers to cut something out.

So the secret to the whole thing is to keep an interesting plot that keeps the player interested and wondering how it all ends (just like a book or a movie), but doing so in a way that never distracts from the fact that you are playing a game and it should never slow down the pace of the action.

id software should have had a fan based contest to see who could write the best script.
a missed opportunity to make the game we would want to play

axbaby wrote:id software should have had a fan based contest to see who could write the best script.
a missed opportunity to make the game we would want to play

That would be quality but then a whole world of work reading the enteries that would come in...

Plot isn't what makes games good. Gameplay is what makes games good.

axbaby wrote:id software should have had a fan based contest to see who could write the best script.
a missed opportunity to make the game we would want to play

Naturally. Because fan fiction doesn't suck at all, and we would all flock to support "the community".

feedback wrote:Plot isn't what makes games good. Gameplay is what makes games good.

you can say that for a quake 3 type of game, and that's about it. But plot means alot in this day and age.

after all, what's good about loading up another map with a few hundred more enemies if you don't know wtf you're doing for the next 8 hours or so.

Tsakali wrote:what's good about loading up another map with a few hundred more enemies if you don't know wtf you're doing for the next 8 hours or so.

What's good is it's fun, if the map is designed well. That includes what the enemies do. You would know what you were doing if there was a brief intro before you start the game. It's obvious that too much focus on telling a story takes away from the gameplay. At least, it should be obvious.

DTS wrote:

Tsakali wrote:what's good about loading up another map with a few hundred more enemies if you don't know wtf you're doing for the next 8 hours or so.

What's good is it's fun, if the map is designed well. That includes what the enemies do. You would know what you were doing if there was a brief intro before you start the game. It's obvious that too much focus on telling a story takes away from the gameplay. At least, it should be obvious.

Have you ever put one of your fingers into a woman's vaginal cavity?

Tsakali wrote:

feedback wrote:Plot isn't what makes games good. Gameplay is what makes games good.

you can say that for a quake 3 type of game, and that's about it. But plot means alot in this day and age.

after all, what's good about loading up another map with a few hundred more enemies if you don't know wtf you're doing for the next 8 hours or so.

There are two sides to this- System Shock 2- amazing game, all atmosphere and pacing of the story. Actual story? Hardly there, but it doesn't matter. Half Life - great game, zero story.

Then look at Deus Ex- amazing game, lots of atmosphere and immersion, great story. What does it mean? great gameplay + great story = great game. great gameplay + adequate story = good game. boring, repetitive gameplay + good story = boring, repetitive game.

Doombrain wrote: Have you ever put one of your fingers into a woman's vaginal cavity?

Do you need to ask?

Half Life and System Shock 2 have zero story?

WTF kind of bizzaro world do you live in? They have two of the most amazingly well presented stories in video game history...

I will agree on its not so much the "story" thats important but how "its presented to the player".

EDIT: To back up my point, look at Half Life and Doom 3. Both have nearly exactly the same story, but which one is presented better?

people that write screenplays like watching movies
people that write books like reading books
people that write video games ... maybe they should get a writer that likes video games.

obsidian wrote:Because so much more work goes into creating a particular 'scene' of a game, it's hard for game developers to cut something out.

well... a lot of that could be avoided by developing a game with the rigor of a movie.
the entire game's story should really be written and story-boarded scene for scene before anyone starts rendering scenery.

o'dium wrote:Half Life and System Shock 2 have zero story?

WTF kind of bizzaro world do you live in? They have two of the most amazingly well presented stories in video game history...

I will agree on its not so much the "story" thats important but how "its presented to the player".

EDIT: To back up my point, look at Half Life and Doom 3. Both have nearly exactly the same story, but which one is presented better?

Half Life - Aliens invade, government cover-up.

System Shock 2 - zombies on a ship, AI tells you to do things, one major plot twist.

They both have simple stories that excelled in the telling of that story.

Excelled in telling of the story - i.e. they had good stories. You think that just because the plots simple, that there isnt a story there at all? lol...

What makes a story "good" then? Was Doom 3's story good, only they didn't present it properly?

Story schmory faggot dorry. There is really only one criterion for "DA STORY" of a video game: does it drawn you in and substantially enhance your gameplay experience. Amount of, or complexity of...twists or whatever the fuck....none of it means fuckall unless it serves that purpose. It either enriches your playtime of said game or it doesn't. END OF LINE.